Durability Of Velocity Aerohead Rims In 20/24 Hole Drillings.
 

dustoyevsky wrote:

Chalo wrote:

You can always get what you want if there is no limit to how much you
are willing and able to spend for it. *The problem thus created is at
the other end of the market, where inexpensive, rugged field-grade
equipment disappears because the most profitable [suggestible]
fraction of the market has been snookered into buying something less
for more money.

I'm far from the cutting edge of the market and I can get what I want,
at reasonable prices.

You could guess that upper-end parts have driven lower-end parts out
of the catalogs, but that's just a guess. In the scramble to be
competitive in a fairly small world market, I'd think manufacturers
would take profit wherever they could.

One reflection of this is the availability of what I would call low
and mid-priced pre-built wheels; they're not all priced into the
stratosphere by any means.

"Suggestible" and "snookered" are pejorative rhetorical devices.
People who ride for sport and who, due to being successful in life,
can afford high-end components are not, I would suggest, either
"stupid" or "gullible" when it comes to "buying something less (as in
less weight and/or wind resistance?) for more".

Try to remember I work on broken stuff every day at the bike shop, and
I have the wholesale prices close at hand. I know a lesser wheel that
costs more when I see one. I can get a bewildering array of packaged
wheels for my customers, but I don't-- and frankly, my customers don't
ask for them.

I could build 20-spoke wheels too. They'd be as good or better than
the packaged wheel equivalent, because I've been building strong
wheels for a long time. And they'd weigh a little less and have a
little less aero drag than good wheels with normal spoke counts. But
those subtle/unmeasurable benefits would come along with unsubtle/
obvious shortcomings in durability and reliability. So I don't build
wheels that suck, even though I could, and even though they'd cost
less in materials and take me less time to build than wheels with
adequate spoke counts.

Take note of that: Low spoke count wheels cost less in materials and
take less time to build. Do you think manufacturers are doing these
things just for your increased performance? And why does a wheel that
costs less to them cost more to you? If you don't think the term
"snookered" applies here, you're probably not looking at the situation
critically enough.

Chalo

Durability Of Velocity Aerohead Rims In 20/24 Hole Drillings.
 

On Nov 10, 12:38*am, Chalo wrote:
dustoyevsky wrote:

Chalo wrote:

You can always get what you want if there is no limit to how much you
are willing and able to spend for it. *The problem thus created is at
the other end of the market, where inexpensive, rugged field-grade
equipment disappears because the most profitable [suggestible]
fraction of the market has been snookered into buying something less
for more money.

I'm far from the cutting edge of the market and I can get what I want,
at reasonable prices.

You could guess that upper-end parts have driven lower-end parts out
of the catalogs, but that's just a guess. In the scramble to be
competitive in a fairly small world market, I'd think manufacturers
would take profit wherever they could.

One reflection of this is the availability of what I would call low
and mid-priced pre-built wheels; they're not all priced into the
stratosphere by any means.

"Suggestible" and "snookered" are pejorative rhetorical devices.
People who ride for sport and who, due to being successful in life,
can afford high-end components are not, I would suggest, either
"stupid" or "gullible" when it comes to "buying something less (as in
less weight and/or wind resistance?) for more".

Try to remember I work on broken stuff every day at the bike shop, and
I have the wholesale prices close at hand. *I know a lesser wheel that
costs more when I see one. *I can get a bewildering array of packaged
wheels for my customers, but I don't-- and frankly, my customers don't
ask for them.

I could build 20-spoke wheels too. *They'd be as good or better than
the packaged wheel equivalent, because I've been building strong
wheels for a long time. *And they'd weigh a little less and have a
little less aero drag than good wheels with normal spoke counts. *But
those subtle/unmeasurable benefits would come along with unsubtle/
obvious shortcomings in durability and reliability. *So I don't build
wheels that suck, even though I could, and even though they'd cost
less in materials and take me less time to build than wheels with
adequate spoke counts.

Take note of that: *Low spoke count wheels cost less in materials and
take less time to build. *Do you think manufacturers are doing these
things just for your increased performance? *And why does a wheel that
costs less to them cost more to you? *If you don't think the term
"snookered" applies here, you're probably not looking at the situation
critically enough.

Your last paragraph is true only if "packaged" low spoke count wheels
were built with the same materials and in the same way as regular
wheels, which they are not.

I'm sure that the relatively heavy, proprietary rims used on the
Ksyrium wheels are more expensive than, say, an Aerohead -- and the
per-spoke price for those flat-bladed Zicral 7075 aluminum spokes is
high -- a lot higher than mundane stainless steel spokes. I don't
know whether the automated machinery takes longer to build a 20 spoke
uber-wheel with Mavic's "Isopulse lacing design" or a 36 spoke
ordinary wheel. If done by hand, though, it might be impossible to
build a Ksyrium-like low spoke count wheel without some sort of press
or ram to compress the rim while you wind up the spokes to the tension
necessary to hold the wheel true. Or if you can't afford the ram, I
suppose you could just use some glue. So you need to factor in glue
time and cost. You also have to factor in the time for Isopulse
lacing (including the time for figuring out what "Isopulse lacing"
means.) -- Jay Beattie.

Durability Of Velocity Aerohead Rims In 20/24 Hole Drillings.
 

Jay Beattie wrote:

Chalo wrote:

Take note of that: *Low spoke count wheels cost less in materials and
take less time to build. *Do you think manufacturers are doing these
things just for your increased performance? *And why does a wheel that
costs less to them cost more to you? *If you don't think the term
"snookered" applies here, you're probably not looking at the situation
critically enough.

Your last paragraph is true only if *"packaged" low spoke count wheels
were built with the same materials and in the same way as regular
wheels, which they are not.

I'm sure that the relatively heavy, proprietary rims used on the
Ksyrium wheels are more expensive than, say, an Aerohead --

Why are you sure of that? Why would it be more expensive than for
example a Chukker, which is much deeper and heavier than an Aerohead
but costs a similar amount?

and the
per-spoke price for those flat-bladed Zicral 7075 aluminum spokes is
high -- a lot higher than mundane stainless steel spokes. *

I tell you this as a seasoned aerospace and high tech machinist: 7075
aluminum is easier to work than 300 series stainless, and it can be
heat treated to maximum strength all at once rather than drawn and
swaged to achieve cold worked strength in several steps. So why do
you believe the cost to produce aluminum spokes is intrinsically
higher than say, 14-15ga butted stainless steel spokes or their flat
counterparts? Is it just because the retail price per replacement
spoke is so many times more? Consider that the latter is probably
unrelated to production cost.

Chalo

Durability Of Velocity Aerohead Rims In 20/24 Hole Drillings.
 

On Nov 10, 2:38*am, Chalo wrote:
dustoyevsky wrote:

Chalo wrote:

You can always get what you want if there is no limit to how much you
are willing and able to spend for it. *The problem thus created is at
the other end of the market, where inexpensive, rugged field-grade
equipment disappears because the most profitable [suggestible]
fraction of the market has been snookered into buying something less
for more money.

I'm far from the cutting edge of the market and I can get what I want,
at reasonable prices.

You could guess that upper-end parts have driven lower-end parts out
of the catalogs, but that's just a guess. In the scramble to be
competitive in a fairly small world market, I'd think manufacturers
would take profit wherever they could.

One reflection of this is the availability of what I would call low
and mid-priced pre-built wheels; they're not all priced into the
stratosphere by any means.

"Suggestible" and "snookered" are pejorative rhetorical devices.
People who ride for sport and who, due to being successful in life,
can afford high-end components are not, I would suggest, either
"stupid" or "gullible" when it comes to "buying something less (as in
less weight and/or wind resistance?) for more".

Try to remember I work on broken stuff every day at the bike shop, and
I have the wholesale prices close at hand. *I know a lesser wheel that
costs more when I see one. *I can get a bewildering array of packaged
wheels for my customers, but I don't-- and frankly, my customers don't
ask for them.

I could build 20-spoke wheels too. *They'd be as good or better than
the packaged wheel equivalent, because I've been building strong
wheels for a long time. *And they'd weigh a little less and have a
little less aero drag than good wheels with normal spoke counts. *But
those subtle/unmeasurable benefits would come along with unsubtle/
obvious shortcomings in durability and reliability. *So I don't build
wheels that suck, even though I could, and even though they'd cost
less in materials and take me less time to build than wheels with
adequate spoke counts.

Take note of that: *Low spoke count wheels cost less in materials and
take less time to build. *Do you think manufacturers are doing these
things just for your increased performance? *And why does a wheel that
costs less to them cost more to you? *If you don't think the term
"snookered" applies here, you're probably not looking at the situation
critically enough.

People are getting excellent use from low spoke count wheels that are
not expensive.
Fewer spokes = less aero drag, all other being equal.

The earlier Nuvation (sp?) wheels broke hub flanges; I think that
problem has been addressed, and those were the only really failure-
prone LSC wheels I happen to know about.

Those are pretty inexpensive wheels. I'm not totally in touch with
brands and price points, since I "don't go there", but I hear reports
of satisfied users of several brands of LSC prebuilts, up and down the
price range.

My cohort doesn't slam hundred-mile dirt road rides on Sunday as in
days of yore; I know I wouldn't, and I'm sure their owners wouldn't
use these LSC "road" wheels for that riding. Or, maybe they would, and
there would be some most excellent beta testing going on g.

If the LSC wheels require more maintenance, some riders, mostly in the
"racer dude" population, are willing to deal with that for the
perceived advantage. I wouldn't call that being "snookered".

LSC, not the thing for utility use? No argument there. I have one set
of LSC wheels, some old Shamals that I bought separately, used.
The front obviously had some miles on it, the rear was near-new. Those
are 16-spoke, F/R. I haven't put tons of miles on them but I did use
the front quite a bit with no problems, when I was well over 200lbs.
The rear was added later and I rode them as a set for awhile before I
finally hit something hard enough to remind me to go back to using my
usual handbuilts (Campy hub, Aerohead rims, 32/35h) in case I really
smacked something and needed to replace a rim and/or spokes. IOW,
you're preaching to the choir to some extent, at least in my case.
Those Aeroheads, with 23mm tires mounted, mostly, have been as
reliable as (for instance) my old 430g Ambrosio Synthesis Durex sew-up
rims, speaking as a rough comparison. If I were riding lots of rough
roads, I'd do as I did in the past, mostly with another Ambrosio rim,
the Elite Durex and run fat tires with thick sidewalls. Those rims
lasted until the sidewalls got ground thin from brake use and
separated from the spoke bed. Why would I want to go to huge rims and
tires? Is someone trying to snooker me?
--D-y

Durability Of Velocity Aerohead Rims In 20/24 Hole Drillings.
 

On Nov 10, 11:42*pm, Chalo wrote:
Jay Beattie wrote:

Chalo wrote:

Take note of that: *Low spoke count wheels cost less in materials and
take less time to build. *Do you think manufacturers are doing these
things just for your increased performance? *And why does a wheel that
costs less to them cost more to you? *If you don't think the term
"snookered" applies here, you're probably not looking at the situation
critically enough.

Your last paragraph is true only if *"packaged" low spoke count wheels
were built with the same materials and in the same way as regular
wheels, which they are not.

I'm sure that the relatively heavy, proprietary rims used on the
Ksyrium wheels are more expensive than, say, an Aerohead --

Why are you sure of that? *Why would it be more expensive than for
example a Chukker, which is much deeper and heavier than an Aerohead
but costs a similar amount?

and the
per-spoke price for those flat-bladed Zicral 7075 aluminum spokes is
high -- a lot higher than mundane stainless steel spokes. *

I tell you this as a seasoned aerospace and high tech machinist: *7075
aluminum is easier to work than 300 series stainless, and it can be
heat treated to maximum strength all at once rather than drawn and
swaged to achieve cold worked strength in several steps. *So why do
you believe the cost to produce aluminum spokes is intrinsically
higher than say, 14-15ga butted stainless steel spokes or their flat
counterparts? *Is it just because the retail price per replacement
spoke is so many times more? *Consider that the latter is probably
unrelated to production cost.


I was actually poking fun at some low spoke count wheels. I shouldn't
have been so dead pan. -- Jay.

Durability Of Velocity Aerohead Rims In 20/24 Hole Drillings.
 

In article
,
" wrote:

On Nov 10, 2:38Â*am, Chalo wrote:
dustoyevsky wrote:

Chalo wrote:

You can always get what you want if there is no limit to how much you
are willing and able to spend for it. Â*The problem thus created is at
the other end of the market, where inexpensive, rugged field-grade
equipment disappears because the most profitable [suggestible]
fraction of the market has been snookered into buying something less
for more money.

I'm far from the cutting edge of the market and I can get what I want,
at reasonable prices.

You could guess that upper-end parts have driven lower-end parts out
of the catalogs, but that's just a guess. In the scramble to be
competitive in a fairly small world market, I'd think manufacturers
would take profit wherever they could.

One reflection of this is the availability of what I would call low
and mid-priced pre-built wheels; they're not all priced into the
stratosphere by any means.

"Suggestible" and "snookered" are pejorative rhetorical devices.
People who ride for sport and who, due to being successful in life,
can afford high-end components are not, I would suggest, either
"stupid" or "gullible" when it comes to "buying something less (as in
less weight and/or wind resistance?) for more".

Try to remember I work on broken stuff every day at the bike shop, and
I have the wholesale prices close at hand. Â*I know a lesser wheel that
costs more when I see one. Â*I can get a bewildering array of packaged
wheels for my customers, but I don't-- and frankly, my customers don't
ask for them.

I could build 20-spoke wheels too. Â*They'd be as good or better than
the packaged wheel equivalent, because I've been building strong
wheels for a long time. Â*And they'd weigh a little less and have a
little less aero drag than good wheels with normal spoke counts. Â*But
those subtle/unmeasurable benefits would come along with unsubtle/
obvious shortcomings in durability and reliability. Â*So I don't build
wheels that suck, even though I could, and even though they'd cost
less in materials and take me less time to build than wheels with
adequate spoke counts.

Take note of that: Â*Low spoke count wheels cost less in materials and
take less time to build. Â*Do you think manufacturers are doing these
things just for your increased performance? Â*And why does a wheel that
costs less to them cost more to you? Â*If you don't think the term
"snookered" applies here, you're probably not looking at the situation
critically enough.

People are getting excellent use from low spoke count wheels that are
not expensive.
Fewer spokes = less aero drag, all other being equal.

The earlier Nuvation (sp?) wheels broke hub flanges; I think that
problem has been addressed, and those were the only really failure-
prone LSC wheels I happen to know about.

Those are pretty inexpensive wheels. I'm not totally in touch with
brands and price points, since I "don't go there", but I hear reports
of satisfied users of several brands of LSC prebuilts, up and down the
price range.

My cohort doesn't slam hundred-mile dirt road rides on Sunday as in
days of yore; I know I wouldn't, and I'm sure their owners wouldn't
use these LSC "road" wheels for that riding. Or, maybe they would, and
there would be some most excellent beta testing going on g.

If the LSC wheels require more maintenance, some riders, mostly in the
"racer dude" population, are willing to deal with that for the
perceived advantage. I wouldn't call that being "snookered".

LSC, not the thing for utility use? No argument there. I have one set
of LSC wheels, some old Shamals that I bought separately, used.
The front obviously had some miles on it, the rear was near-new. Those
are 16-spoke, F/R. I haven't put tons of miles on them but I did use
the front quite a bit with no problems, when I was well over 200lbs.
The rear was added later and I rode them as a set for awhile before I
finally hit something hard enough to remind me to go back to using my
usual handbuilts (Campy hub, Aerohead rims, 32/35h) in case I really
smacked something and needed to replace a rim and/or spokes. IOW,
you're preaching to the choir to some extent, at least in my case.
Those Aeroheads, with 23mm tires mounted, mostly, have been as
reliable as (for instance) my old 430g Ambrosio Synthesis Durex sew-up
rims, speaking as a rough comparison. If I were riding lots of rough
roads, I'd do as I did in the past, mostly with another Ambrosio rim,
the Elite Durex and run fat tires with thick sidewalls. Those rims
lasted until the sidewalls got ground thin from brake use and
separated from the spoke bed. Why would I want to go to huge rims and
tires? Is someone trying to snooker me?

You must have read where Tom Sherman told me that
my 22.5 mm wide Sun Ringle CR18 rims are "rather narrow."
He refuses to answer my question if they are
suitable for 25 mm and 23 mm tires.

--
Michael Press

Durability Of Velocity Aerohead Rims In 20/24 Hole Drillings.
 

In article ,
Tom Sherman °_° wrote:

On 11/11/2010 10:30 PM, Michael Press wrote:
[...]
You must have read where Tom Sherman told me that
my 22.5 mm wide Sun Ringle CR18 rims are "rather narrow."
He refuses to answer my question if they are
suitable for 25 mm and 23 mm tires.

I have no interest in that question, since I have no use for such narrow
tires.

This would be a proper sized rim:
http://www.sun-ringle.com/bmx/rims/rhyno-lite-xl/.

You brought up "rather narrow",
and I expect you to know what
you are talking about. This is
a technical forum.

--
Michael Press

Durability Of Velocity Aerohead Rims In 20/24 Hole Drillings.
 

Jay Beattie wrote:

I was actually poking fun at some low spoke count wheels. I shouldn't
have been so dead pan.

Oh.

Chalo

Durability Of Velocity Aerohead Rims In 20/24 Hole Drillings.
 

On 11/11/2010 10:30 PM, Michael Press wrote:
[...]
You must have read where Tom Sherman told me that
my 22.5 mm wide Sun Ringle CR18 rims are "rather narrow."
He refuses to answer my question if they are
suitable for 25 mm and 23 mm tires.

I have no interest in that question, since I have no use for such narrow
tires.

This would be a proper sized rim:
http://www.sun-ringle.com/bmx/rims/rhyno-lite-xl/.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

Durability Of Velocity Aerohead Rims In 20/24 Hole Drillings.
 

On 11/11/2010 10:45 PM, Michael Press wrote:
In ,
Tom Sherman wrote:

On 11/11/2010 10:30 PM, Michael Press wrote:
[...]
You must have read where Tom Sherman told me that
my 22.5 mm wide Sun Ringle CR18 rims are "rather narrow."
He refuses to answer my question if they are
suitable for 25 mm and 23 mm tires.

I have no interest in that question, since I have no use for such narrow
tires.

This would be a proper sized rim:
http://www.sun-ringle.com/bmx/rims/rhyno-lite-xl/.

You brought up "rather narrow",
and I expect you to know what
you are talking about. This is
a technical forum.

Tires less than 28-mm wide are too narrow, so as I said, I have no
interest in rims for them.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.