32 spokes or 36? What is stronger?

I've heard some say that 32 is stronger because the spokes radiate
straighter, thus the "stright line forces" make the wheel stronger.

Seems logical.

Then the other argument is that 36 spokes must be stronger because more
metal = more strength, and no individual spoke is taking as much of the
weight.

Anyone out there have an educated opinion?

In article .com,
says...


Anyone out there have an educated opinion?


I can think of quite a few! Watch this space :-)

--
Mark (MSA)
______________________________________________
Remember, half the people you know are below average

I've heard some say that 32 is stronger because the spokes radiate
straighter, thus the "stright line forces" make the wheel stronger.

Seems logical.

Then the other argument is that 36 spokes must be stronger because more
metal = more strength, and no individual spoke is taking as much of the
weight.

Anyone out there have an educated opinion?

More spokes = greater strength. But at some point that's irrelevant; spokes
are far stronger than they used to be, and you could build a 24 spoke wheels
with far less chance of spoke failure than used to be the case on a 36 spoke
wheel back in the day.

I have no idea where the "straight line forces" argument comes from, as the
number of spokes has little, if anything, to do with the lacing pattern.

But the simplest answer I can give is that, with modern equipment, a 32
spoke wheel ought to be strong enough for just about any purpose other than
loaded touring or an extremely-heavy rider (and even then I think tire width
has more to do with wheel longevity than the number of spokes).

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
IMBA, BikesBelong, NBDA member

"Velo Psycho" wrote in message
oups.com...
I've heard some say that 32 is stronger because the spokes radiate
straighter, thus the "stright line forces" make the wheel stronger.

Seems logical.

Then the other argument is that 36 spokes must be stronger because more
metal = more strength, and no individual spoke is taking as much of the
weight.

Anyone out there have an educated opinion?

Velo Psycho wrote:

I've heard some say that 32 is stronger because the spokes radiate
straighter, thus the "stright line forces" make the wheel stronger.

Seems logical.

Then the other argument is that 36 spokes must be stronger because more
metal = more strength, and no individual spoke is taking as much of the
weight.

Anyone out there have an educated opinion?

Assuming you use an appropriate spoking pattern and the same materials,
36 spokes are stronger. There are some duff ideas like 36 x4, which can
break the spokes at the nipple end because the angle with the rim is
nowhere near perpendicular.

"Mike Jacoubowsky/Chain Reaction Bicycles"
wrote in message
...
I've heard some say that 32 is stronger because the spokes
radiate
straighter, thus the "stright line forces" make the wheel
stronger.

Seems logical.

Then the other argument is that 36 spokes must be stronger
because more
metal = more strength, and no individual spoke is taking as
much of the
weight.

Anyone out there have an educated opinion?

More spokes = greater strength. But at some point that's
irrelevant; spokes
are far stronger than they used to be, and you could build a 24
spoke wheels
with far less chance of spoke failure than used to be the case
on a 36 spoke
wheel back in the day.

O.K., Mike, how far back was "the day"? It seems to me that the
14/15g DT spokes I bought in '70s were about the same as the DT
spokes I buy today (except for price and excluding the wide-bend
series, whatever its official name was). The Trois Etoiles I
bought before that seemed to be pretty good, too. I had some
Union zinc plated spokes that broke a lot, but they probably
broke because I cooked them up tying and soldering with a torch
(hey, we can all do stupid things when we are young). It seems
to me that some of the real modern spokes are way worse than
anything back in the day -- although the modern, bad-idea spokes
come in pre-built wheels and not in boxes that anyone could
afford to buy and build into a normal wheel. -- Jay Beattie.

Velo Psycho wrote:

I've heard some say that 32 is stronger because the spokes radiate
straighter, thus the "stright line forces" make the wheel stronger.

Seems logical.

Really? Could you explain what is meant by this?
You can do radial lacing with either number of spokes (but I wouldn't
recommend it), and you can do tangential lacing with either number
of spokes. I don't see where the "radiate straighter" idea comes from.

Then the other argument is that 36 spokes must be stronger because more
metal = more strength, and no individual spoke is taking as much of the
weight.

For bikes that really need stronger than average wheels, such as tandems
and loaded touring bikes, I've never seen anyone advocate reducing the
spoke count to add strength. 32 spokes are generally strong enough for
most bicycles, but if other factors are kept equal then 36 would still
be stronger.

O.K., Mike, how far back was "the day"? It seems to me that the
14/15g DT spokes I bought in '70s were about the same as the DT
spokes I buy today (except for price and excluding the wide-bend
series, whatever its official name was). The Trois Etoiles I
bought before that seemed to be pretty good, too. I had some
Union zinc plated spokes that broke a lot, but they probably
broke because I cooked them up tying and soldering with a torch
(hey, we can all do stupid things when we are young). It seems
to me that some of the real modern spokes are way worse than
anything back in the day -- although the modern, bad-idea spokes
come in pre-built wheels and not in boxes that anyone could
afford to buy and build into a normal wheel. -- Jay Beattie.

Jay: Your experiences and mine don't correlate. We're talking the same time
period (early-to-mid-70s) and even the same spokes (Trios Etoiles/ 3-star).
We would see Robergel Trios Etoiles failing frequently, far more than their
zinc-coated ugly-duckling cousin (Sport?). Those were great spokes, but my
were they ugly looking... people would spend a lot of time polishing off the
zinc coating, but they'd look pretty bad pretty quickly. Early DT spokes may
have been a bit better, but they weren't, in my opinion, the same quality as
they are today.

In my opinion, spoke quality improved dramtically sometime during the late
80s. Either that or people finally started learning how to build wheels,
probably a bit of each.

Perhaps Jobst knows of any changes in metallurgy or process that might have
come about over the years? Or not?

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
IMBA, BikesBelong, NBDA member

"Mike Jacoubowsky/Chain Reaction Bicycles" wrote
in message ...
But the simplest answer I can give is that, with modern equipment, a 32
spoke wheel ought to be strong enough for just about any purpose other
than
loaded touring or an extremely-heavy rider (and even then I think tire
width
has more to do with wheel longevity than the number of spokes).

Mike,

What's your definition of an "extremely heavy" rider?

H.

Mike Jacoubowsky/Chain Reaction Bicycles wrote:

Then the other argument is that 36 spokes must be stronger because
more metal = more strength, and no individual spoke is taking as
much of the weight.

More spokes = greater strength. But at some point that's irrelevant;
spokes are far stronger than they used to be, and you could build a
24 spoke wheels with far less chance of spoke failure than used to be
the case on a 36 spoke wheel back in the day.

The strength of the spokes isn't the problem. It's the rim. More spokes
support the rim better. This is good for two reasons. One, obviously more
spokes make a stronger wheel, more resistant to the rim being bent. Two, if a
spoke breaks in a 36 spoke wheel, chances are the rim will still run true. A 32
spoke wheel often goes out of true enough that it won't spin freely in the
frame.

But the simplest answer I can give is that, with modern equipment, a
32 spoke wheel ought to be strong enough for just about any purpose
other than loaded touring or an extremely-heavy rider (and even then
I think tire width has more to do with wheel longevity than the
number of spokes).

This is true, but 36 spokes are even better, being more fail-safe. This is a
great place to "spend" a whole extra ounce. Unfortunately 36 hole rims and hubs
are getting hard to find. In fact any conventional wheels are getting hard to
find!

My 32 spoke MTB wheels have always required occasional truing, while my 36 spoke
ones went for years without being touched by a spoke wrench -- in spite of
having the lightest rim on the market.

Matt O.

A gullible person wrote:

I've heard some say that 32 is stronger because the spokes radiate
straighter, thus the "stright line forces" make the wheel stronger.

Balderdash!

Seems logical.

If this were true, it would be addressed by using a different cross pattern.

Then the other argument is that 36 spokes must be stronger because more
metal = more strength, and no individual spoke is taking as much of the
weight.

Yep.

Sheldon "More Is More" Brown
+---------------------------------------------------+
| Absurdity, n.: A statement or belief manifestly |
| inconsistent with one's own opinion. |
| --Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary" |
+---------------------------------------------------+
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 http://sheldonbrown.com