spoke fatigue troll

The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
Ben C? wrote:
[...]
There are real engineers working at places like Mavic and Shimano
but
they don't post on RBT (as far as we know) so all we have to go
on is
analysis of the finished products and dubious marketing material.

Why spend money on engineering when it could be spent on marketing?

but they /do/ spend it on engineering!!! where do you think
straight pull spokes come from??? where do welded and machined
rims come from??? that **** ain't cheap.

And completely unnecessary.

ah, the crux of a lightweight argument. no details. no facts. just
hand waving and subjectivity!

If the spokes do not break, the wheel stays true and braking is fine,
what more does one get for spending several hundred dollars more?
Bragging rights while the bike is parked at the coffee shop?

1. i don't drink coffee, so you won't find me there.
2. my bikes get ridden and look like ****. so no pose value there either.

fabricating straw men, then criticizing that fabrication is simply
lightweight.

So "jim beam" just likes to spend extra money? Or is he incapable of
building a proper wheel out of conventional components? Can he not find
a competent builder of proper wheels when so many others do? The mystery
of the Bourbon Man deepens.

Conventional spoked wheels with non-machined rims work just fine at
a much lower cost, thank you.

they work, but not as well, in several regards previously discussed.

Yes, in "jim beam" world. The rest of us live in the real world.

do your homework. lightweight.

What homework? Reading manufacturer's propaganda and online reviews of
dubious origin?

Spending money unnecessarily is not good engineering practice, but
how would "jim beam" know that?

"unnecessarily"??? that's utter bull****. r & d - it's what keeps
good companies alive.

Plenty of companies do just fine selling unnecessary crap through
marketing. A salesman should realize this, no?

more straw men? lightweight.

Open your eyes, "jim".

After all, many of the customers are simply interested in the
"latest and greatest" and will be frequently upgrading for the
sake of staying "current", so durability does not matter too much.

rubbish. see above.

Hit a nerve there "jim"? One only needs to observe the conformist
crowd to see that fashion is the most important thing.

the defense of the luddite lightweight.

Ah, "jim" can not insult his sales clients, so he vents on RBT.

coming from a guy whose communist rants show real societal interaction
problems, that's rich. all that exhaust-sucking is getting to you tom.
time to switch back to an ordinary.

The poster who constantly resorts to childish insults lectures on
societal interaction! What a hoot!

Remember, conforming to the crowd and having the right look on the
"training" rides is what matters to most of the riders who
purchase things like pre-built Mavic wheels.


no, they buy and ride them because they're much more reliable than
the typical garbage built by their lbs. 5 out of 6 local shops in
my experience couldn't build a decent wheel if their life depended
on it.

There are plenty of sources for decent conventional wheels. FedEx
and UPS will happily deliver the wheels to your door.

One can even buy inexpensive machine built wheels with quality
conventional components, and do the final truing, tensioning, etc.
one's self.

I suppose "jim" likes paying more for wheels with expensive
proprietary parts.

my pre-built mavic and shimano wheels have been fab straight out of
the box. and i'm no lightweight. [unlike you.]

My LBS built wheels have been fine out of the shipping box.


typical tom sherman lightweight non-argument.

Typical "jim beam" non-logic.


see above.

Indeed.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
Ben C? wrote:
[...]
There are real engineers working at places like Mavic and
Shimano but
they don't post on RBT (as far as we know) so all we have to go
on is
analysis of the finished products and dubious marketing material.

Why spend money on engineering when it could be spent on marketing?

but they /do/ spend it on engineering!!! where do you think
straight pull spokes come from??? where do welded and machined
rims come from??? that **** ain't cheap.

And completely unnecessary.

ah, the crux of a lightweight argument. no details. no facts.
just hand waving and subjectivity!

If the spokes do not break, the wheel stays true and braking is fine,
what more does one get for spending several hundred dollars more?
Bragging rights while the bike is parked at the coffee shop?

1. i don't drink coffee, so you won't find me there.
2. my bikes get ridden and look like ****. so no pose value there
either.

fabricating straw men, then criticizing that fabrication is simply
lightweight.

So "jim beam" just likes to spend extra money?

eh?



Or is he incapable of
building a proper wheel out of conventional components?

straw man.


Can he not find
a competent builder of proper wheels when so many others do? The mystery
of the Bourbon Man deepens.

er, read what i said about local shops and my experience. that's hardly
unique.




Conventional spoked wheels with non-machined rims work just fine at
a much lower cost, thank you.

they work, but not as well, in several regards previously discussed.

Yes, in "jim beam" world. The rest of us live in the real world.

do your homework. lightweight.

What homework? Reading manufacturer's propaganda and online reviews of
dubious origin?

no, reading the ****ing archives on why these design elements are
beneficial. selective strawman lightweight.



Spending money unnecessarily is not good engineering practice, but
how would "jim beam" know that?

"unnecessarily"??? that's utter bull****. r & d - it's what keeps
good companies alive.

Plenty of companies do just fine selling unnecessary crap through
marketing. A salesman should realize this, no?

more straw men? lightweight.

Open your eyes, "jim".

oh, the irony.



After all, many of the customers are simply interested in the
"latest and greatest" and will be frequently upgrading for the
sake of staying "current", so durability does not matter too much.

rubbish. see above.

Hit a nerve there "jim"? One only needs to observe the conformist
crowd to see that fashion is the most important thing.

the defense of the luddite lightweight.

Ah, "jim" can not insult his sales clients, so he vents on RBT.

coming from a guy whose communist rants show real societal interaction
problems, that's rich. all that exhaust-sucking is getting to you
tom. time to switch back to an ordinary.

The poster who constantly resorts to childish insults lectures on
societal interaction! What a hoot!

you're too low to the ground tom. the monoxide is killing your brain cells.




Remember, conforming to the crowd and having the right look on
the "training" rides is what matters to most of the riders who
purchase things like pre-built Mavic wheels.


no, they buy and ride them because they're much more reliable than
the typical garbage built by their lbs. 5 out of 6 local shops in
my experience couldn't build a decent wheel if their life depended
on it.

There are plenty of sources for decent conventional wheels. FedEx
and UPS will happily deliver the wheels to your door.

One can even buy inexpensive machine built wheels with quality
conventional components, and do the final truing, tensioning, etc.
one's self.

I suppose "jim" likes paying more for wheels with expensive
proprietary parts.

my pre-built mavic and shimano wheels have been fab straight out
of the box. and i'm no lightweight. [unlike you.]

My LBS built wheels have been fine out of the shipping box.


typical tom sherman lightweight non-argument.

Typical "jim beam" non-logic.


see above.

Indeed.


s/n = 1:100

lightweight.

The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
Ben C? wrote:
[...]
There are real engineers working at places like Mavic and
Shimano but
they don't post on RBT (as far as we know) so all we have to go
on is
analysis of the finished products and dubious marketing material.

Why spend money on engineering when it could be spent on marketing?

but they /do/ spend it on engineering!!! where do you think
straight pull spokes come from??? where do welded and machined
rims come from??? that **** ain't cheap.

And completely unnecessary.

ah, the crux of a lightweight argument. no details. no facts.
just hand waving and subjectivity!

If the spokes do not break, the wheel stays true and braking is
fine, what more does one get for spending several hundred dollars
more? Bragging rights while the bike is parked at the coffee shop?

1. i don't drink coffee, so you won't find me there.
2. my bikes get ridden and look like ****. so no pose value there
either.

fabricating straw men, then criticizing that fabrication is simply
lightweight.

So "jim beam" just likes to spend extra money?

eh?



Or is he incapable of building a proper wheel out of conventional
components?

straw man.


Can he not find a competent builder of proper wheels when so many
others do? The mystery of the Bourbon Man deepens.

er, read what i said about local shops and my experience. that's hardly
unique.




Conventional spoked wheels with non-machined rims work just fine
at a much lower cost, thank you.

they work, but not as well, in several regards previously discussed.

Yes, in "jim beam" world. The rest of us live in the real world.

do your homework. lightweight.

What homework? Reading manufacturer's propaganda and online reviews of
dubious origin?

no, reading the ****ing archives on why these design elements are
beneficial. selective strawman lightweight.



Spending money unnecessarily is not good engineering practice, but
how would "jim beam" know that?

"unnecessarily"??? that's utter bull****. r & d - it's what keeps
good companies alive.

Plenty of companies do just fine selling unnecessary crap through
marketing. A salesman should realize this, no?

more straw men? lightweight.

Open your eyes, "jim".

oh, the irony.



After all, many of the customers are simply interested in the
"latest and greatest" and will be frequently upgrading for the
sake of staying "current", so durability does not matter too much.

rubbish. see above.

Hit a nerve there "jim"? One only needs to observe the conformist
crowd to see that fashion is the most important thing.

the defense of the luddite lightweight.

Ah, "jim" can not insult his sales clients, so he vents on RBT.

coming from a guy whose communist rants show real societal
interaction problems, that's rich. all that exhaust-sucking is
getting to you tom. time to switch back to an ordinary.

The poster who constantly resorts to childish insults lectures on
societal interaction! What a hoot!

you're too low to the ground tom. the monoxide is killing your brain
cells.




Remember, conforming to the crowd and having the right look on
the "training" rides is what matters to most of the riders who
purchase things like pre-built Mavic wheels.


no, they buy and ride them because they're much more reliable
than the typical garbage built by their lbs. 5 out of 6 local
shops in my experience couldn't build a decent wheel if their
life depended on it.

There are plenty of sources for decent conventional wheels. FedEx
and UPS will happily deliver the wheels to your door.

One can even buy inexpensive machine built wheels with quality
conventional components, and do the final truing, tensioning, etc.
one's self.

I suppose "jim" likes paying more for wheels with expensive
proprietary parts.

my pre-built mavic and shimano wheels have been fab straight out
of the box. and i'm no lightweight. [unlike you.]

My LBS built wheels have been fine out of the shipping box.


typical tom sherman lightweight non-argument.

Typical "jim beam" non-logic.


see above.

Indeed.


s/n = 1:100

lightweight.

Much smoke but no fire from the "jim beam" sock puppet.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
Ben C? wrote:
[...]
There are real engineers working at places like Mavic and
Shimano but
they don't post on RBT (as far as we know) so all we have to
go on is
analysis of the finished products and dubious marketing material.

Why spend money on engineering when it could be spent on
marketing?

but they /do/ spend it on engineering!!! where do you think
straight pull spokes come from??? where do welded and machined
rims come from??? that **** ain't cheap.

And completely unnecessary.

ah, the crux of a lightweight argument. no details. no facts.
just hand waving and subjectivity!

If the spokes do not break, the wheel stays true and braking is
fine, what more does one get for spending several hundred dollars
more? Bragging rights while the bike is parked at the coffee shop?

1. i don't drink coffee, so you won't find me there.
2. my bikes get ridden and look like ****. so no pose value there
either.

fabricating straw men, then criticizing that fabrication is simply
lightweight.

So "jim beam" just likes to spend extra money?

eh?



Or is he incapable of building a proper wheel out of conventional
components?

straw man.


Can he not find a competent builder of proper wheels when so many
others do? The mystery of the Bourbon Man deepens.

er, read what i said about local shops and my experience. that's
hardly unique.




Conventional spoked wheels with non-machined rims work just fine
at a much lower cost, thank you.

they work, but not as well, in several regards previously discussed.

Yes, in "jim beam" world. The rest of us live in the real world.

do your homework. lightweight.

What homework? Reading manufacturer's propaganda and online reviews
of dubious origin?

no, reading the ****ing archives on why these design elements are
beneficial. selective strawman lightweight.



Spending money unnecessarily is not good engineering practice,
but how would "jim beam" know that?

"unnecessarily"??? that's utter bull****. r & d - it's what
keeps good companies alive.

Plenty of companies do just fine selling unnecessary crap through
marketing. A salesman should realize this, no?

more straw men? lightweight.

Open your eyes, "jim".

oh, the irony.



After all, many of the customers are simply interested in the
"latest and greatest" and will be frequently upgrading for the
sake of staying "current", so durability does not matter too much.

rubbish. see above.

Hit a nerve there "jim"? One only needs to observe the conformist
crowd to see that fashion is the most important thing.

the defense of the luddite lightweight.

Ah, "jim" can not insult his sales clients, so he vents on RBT.

coming from a guy whose communist rants show real societal
interaction problems, that's rich. all that exhaust-sucking is
getting to you tom. time to switch back to an ordinary.

The poster who constantly resorts to childish insults lectures on
societal interaction! What a hoot!

you're too low to the ground tom. the monoxide is killing your brain
cells.




Remember, conforming to the crowd and having the right look on
the "training" rides is what matters to most of the riders who
purchase things like pre-built Mavic wheels.


no, they buy and ride them because they're much more reliable
than the typical garbage built by their lbs. 5 out of 6 local
shops in my experience couldn't build a decent wheel if their
life depended on it.

There are plenty of sources for decent conventional wheels. FedEx
and UPS will happily deliver the wheels to your door.

One can even buy inexpensive machine built wheels with quality
conventional components, and do the final truing, tensioning,
etc. one's self.

I suppose "jim" likes paying more for wheels with expensive
proprietary parts.

my pre-built mavic and shimano wheels have been fab straight out
of the box. and i'm no lightweight. [unlike you.]

My LBS built wheels have been fine out of the shipping box.


typical tom sherman lightweight non-argument.

Typical "jim beam" non-logic.


see above.

Indeed.


s/n = 1:100

lightweight.

Much smoke but no fire from the "jim beam" sock puppet.


so still no signal.

tell me tom, why do you bother? it's sort of interesting. an a sick,
pervy "watching a car wreck" kinda way. do you perceive some kind of
benefit from just yapping, without actually saying anything? can't you
just watch tv?

In article ,
_ wrote:

On Sun, 27 Apr 2008 06:19:09 -0500, Tom Sherman wrote:

Ben C? wrote:
[...]
There are real engineers working at places like Mavic and Shimano but
they don't post on RBT (as far as we know) so all we have to go on is
analysis of the finished products and dubious marketing material.

Why spend money on engineering when it could be spent on marketing?
After all, many of the customers are simply interested in the "latest
and greatest" and will be frequently upgrading for the sake of staying
"current", so durability does not matter too much.

Remember, conforming to the crowd and having the right look on the
"training" rides is what matters to most of the riders who purchase
things like pre-built Mavic wheels.

Parts that last don't make money on repeat sales.

Cycling marketing has always been about fads - kids like "jim beam" are the
prime target; gullible and voluble.

jim beam is one of the salesmen.

--
Michael Press

The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
Ben C? wrote:
[...]
There are real engineers working at places like Mavic and
Shimano but
they don't post on RBT (as far as we know) so all we have to
go on is
analysis of the finished products and dubious marketing
material.

Why spend money on engineering when it could be spent on
marketing?

but they /do/ spend it on engineering!!! where do you think
straight pull spokes come from??? where do welded and machined
rims come from??? that **** ain't cheap.

And completely unnecessary.

ah, the crux of a lightweight argument. no details. no facts.
just hand waving and subjectivity!

If the spokes do not break, the wheel stays true and braking is
fine, what more does one get for spending several hundred dollars
more? Bragging rights while the bike is parked at the coffee shop?

1. i don't drink coffee, so you won't find me there.
2. my bikes get ridden and look like ****. so no pose value there
either.

fabricating straw men, then criticizing that fabrication is simply
lightweight.

So "jim beam" just likes to spend extra money?

eh?



Or is he incapable of building a proper wheel out of conventional
components?

straw man.


Can he not find a competent builder of proper wheels when so many
others do? The mystery of the Bourbon Man deepens.

er, read what i said about local shops and my experience. that's
hardly unique.




Conventional spoked wheels with non-machined rims work just fine
at a much lower cost, thank you.

they work, but not as well, in several regards previously discussed.

Yes, in "jim beam" world. The rest of us live in the real world.

do your homework. lightweight.

What homework? Reading manufacturer's propaganda and online reviews
of dubious origin?

no, reading the ****ing archives on why these design elements are
beneficial. selective strawman lightweight.



Spending money unnecessarily is not good engineering practice,
but how would "jim beam" know that?

"unnecessarily"??? that's utter bull****. r & d - it's what
keeps good companies alive.

Plenty of companies do just fine selling unnecessary crap through
marketing. A salesman should realize this, no?

more straw men? lightweight.

Open your eyes, "jim".

oh, the irony.



After all, many of the customers are simply interested in the
"latest and greatest" and will be frequently upgrading for the
sake of staying "current", so durability does not matter too
much.

rubbish. see above.

Hit a nerve there "jim"? One only needs to observe the
conformist crowd to see that fashion is the most important thing.

the defense of the luddite lightweight.

Ah, "jim" can not insult his sales clients, so he vents on RBT.

coming from a guy whose communist rants show real societal
interaction problems, that's rich. all that exhaust-sucking is
getting to you tom. time to switch back to an ordinary.

The poster who constantly resorts to childish insults lectures on
societal interaction! What a hoot!

you're too low to the ground tom. the monoxide is killing your brain
cells.




Remember, conforming to the crowd and having the right look on
the "training" rides is what matters to most of the riders who
purchase things like pre-built Mavic wheels.


no, they buy and ride them because they're much more reliable
than the typical garbage built by their lbs. 5 out of 6 local
shops in my experience couldn't build a decent wheel if their
life depended on it.

There are plenty of sources for decent conventional wheels.
FedEx and UPS will happily deliver the wheels to your door.

One can even buy inexpensive machine built wheels with quality
conventional components, and do the final truing, tensioning,
etc. one's self.

I suppose "jim" likes paying more for wheels with expensive
proprietary parts.

my pre-built mavic and shimano wheels have been fab straight
out of the box. and i'm no lightweight. [unlike you.]

My LBS built wheels have been fine out of the shipping box.


typical tom sherman lightweight non-argument.

Typical "jim beam" non-logic.


see above.

Indeed.


s/n = 1:100

lightweight.

Much smoke but no fire from the "jim beam" sock puppet.


so still no signal.

tell me tom, why do you bother? it's sort of interesting. an a sick,
pervy "watching a car wreck" kinda way. do you perceive some kind of
benefit from just yapping, without actually saying anything? can't you
just watch tv?

Of more interest to the RBT readership, why do you hide behind a sock
puppet, while constantly sniping at others? What are hiding from or
afraid of?

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
Ben C? wrote:
[...]
There are real engineers working at places like Mavic and
Shimano but
they don't post on RBT (as far as we know) so all we have to
go on is
analysis of the finished products and dubious marketing
material.

Why spend money on engineering when it could be spent on
marketing?

but they /do/ spend it on engineering!!! where do you think
straight pull spokes come from??? where do welded and
machined rims come from??? that **** ain't cheap.

And completely unnecessary.

ah, the crux of a lightweight argument. no details. no facts.
just hand waving and subjectivity!

If the spokes do not break, the wheel stays true and braking is
fine, what more does one get for spending several hundred dollars
more? Bragging rights while the bike is parked at the coffee shop?

1. i don't drink coffee, so you won't find me there.
2. my bikes get ridden and look like ****. so no pose value there
either.

fabricating straw men, then criticizing that fabrication is simply
lightweight.

So "jim beam" just likes to spend extra money?

eh?



Or is he incapable of building a proper wheel out of conventional
components?

straw man.


Can he not find a competent builder of proper wheels when so many
others do? The mystery of the Bourbon Man deepens.

er, read what i said about local shops and my experience. that's
hardly unique.




Conventional spoked wheels with non-machined rims work just
fine at a much lower cost, thank you.

they work, but not as well, in several regards previously
discussed.

Yes, in "jim beam" world. The rest of us live in the real world.

do your homework. lightweight.

What homework? Reading manufacturer's propaganda and online reviews
of dubious origin?

no, reading the ****ing archives on why these design elements are
beneficial. selective strawman lightweight.



Spending money unnecessarily is not good engineering practice,
but how would "jim beam" know that?

"unnecessarily"??? that's utter bull****. r & d - it's what
keeps good companies alive.

Plenty of companies do just fine selling unnecessary crap through
marketing. A salesman should realize this, no?

more straw men? lightweight.

Open your eyes, "jim".

oh, the irony.



After all, many of the customers are simply interested in the
"latest and greatest" and will be frequently upgrading for
the sake of staying "current", so durability does not matter
too much.

rubbish. see above.

Hit a nerve there "jim"? One only needs to observe the
conformist crowd to see that fashion is the most important thing.

the defense of the luddite lightweight.

Ah, "jim" can not insult his sales clients, so he vents on RBT.

coming from a guy whose communist rants show real societal
interaction problems, that's rich. all that exhaust-sucking is
getting to you tom. time to switch back to an ordinary.

The poster who constantly resorts to childish insults lectures on
societal interaction! What a hoot!

you're too low to the ground tom. the monoxide is killing your
brain cells.




Remember, conforming to the crowd and having the right look
on the "training" rides is what matters to most of the riders
who purchase things like pre-built Mavic wheels.


no, they buy and ride them because they're much more reliable
than the typical garbage built by their lbs. 5 out of 6 local
shops in my experience couldn't build a decent wheel if their
life depended on it.

There are plenty of sources for decent conventional wheels.
FedEx and UPS will happily deliver the wheels to your door.

One can even buy inexpensive machine built wheels with quality
conventional components, and do the final truing, tensioning,
etc. one's self.

I suppose "jim" likes paying more for wheels with expensive
proprietary parts.

my pre-built mavic and shimano wheels have been fab straight
out of the box. and i'm no lightweight. [unlike you.]

My LBS built wheels have been fine out of the shipping box.


typical tom sherman lightweight non-argument.

Typical "jim beam" non-logic.


see above.

Indeed.


s/n = 1:100

lightweight.

Much smoke but no fire from the "jim beam" sock puppet.


so still no signal.

tell me tom, why do you bother? it's sort of interesting. an a sick,
pervy "watching a car wreck" kinda way. do you perceive some kind of
benefit from just yapping, without actually saying anything? can't
you just watch tv?

Of more interest to the RBT readership, why do you hide behind a sock
puppet, while constantly sniping at others? What are hiding from or
afraid of?


because it annoys you so excellently!

The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
Ben C? wrote:
[...]
There are real engineers working at places like Mavic and
Shimano but
they don't post on RBT (as far as we know) so all we have
to go on is
analysis of the finished products and dubious marketing
material.

Why spend money on engineering when it could be spent on
marketing?

but they /do/ spend it on engineering!!! where do you think
straight pull spokes come from??? where do welded and
machined rims come from??? that **** ain't cheap.

And completely unnecessary.

ah, the crux of a lightweight argument. no details. no
facts. just hand waving and subjectivity!

If the spokes do not break, the wheel stays true and braking is
fine, what more does one get for spending several hundred
dollars more? Bragging rights while the bike is parked at the
coffee shop?

1. i don't drink coffee, so you won't find me there.
2. my bikes get ridden and look like ****. so no pose value
there either.

fabricating straw men, then criticizing that fabrication is
simply lightweight.

So "jim beam" just likes to spend extra money?

eh?



Or is he incapable of building a proper wheel out of conventional
components?

straw man.


Can he not find a competent builder of proper wheels when so many
others do? The mystery of the Bourbon Man deepens.

er, read what i said about local shops and my experience. that's
hardly unique.




Conventional spoked wheels with non-machined rims work just
fine at a much lower cost, thank you.

they work, but not as well, in several regards previously
discussed.

Yes, in "jim beam" world. The rest of us live in the real world.

do your homework. lightweight.

What homework? Reading manufacturer's propaganda and online
reviews of dubious origin?

no, reading the ****ing archives on why these design elements are
beneficial. selective strawman lightweight.



Spending money unnecessarily is not good engineering practice,
but how would "jim beam" know that?

"unnecessarily"??? that's utter bull****. r & d - it's what
keeps good companies alive.

Plenty of companies do just fine selling unnecessary crap
through marketing. A salesman should realize this, no?

more straw men? lightweight.

Open your eyes, "jim".

oh, the irony.



After all, many of the customers are simply interested in
the "latest and greatest" and will be frequently upgrading
for the sake of staying "current", so durability does not
matter too much.

rubbish. see above.

Hit a nerve there "jim"? One only needs to observe the
conformist crowd to see that fashion is the most important thing.

the defense of the luddite lightweight.

Ah, "jim" can not insult his sales clients, so he vents on RBT.

coming from a guy whose communist rants show real societal
interaction problems, that's rich. all that exhaust-sucking is
getting to you tom. time to switch back to an ordinary.

The poster who constantly resorts to childish insults lectures on
societal interaction! What a hoot!

you're too low to the ground tom. the monoxide is killing your
brain cells.




Remember, conforming to the crowd and having the right look
on the "training" rides is what matters to most of the
riders who purchase things like pre-built Mavic wheels.


no, they buy and ride them because they're much more reliable
than the typical garbage built by their lbs. 5 out of 6
local shops in my experience couldn't build a decent wheel if
their life depended on it.

There are plenty of sources for decent conventional wheels.
FedEx and UPS will happily deliver the wheels to your door.

One can even buy inexpensive machine built wheels with quality
conventional components, and do the final truing, tensioning,
etc. one's self.

I suppose "jim" likes paying more for wheels with expensive
proprietary parts.

my pre-built mavic and shimano wheels have been fab straight
out of the box. and i'm no lightweight. [unlike you.]

My LBS built wheels have been fine out of the shipping box.


typical tom sherman lightweight non-argument.

Typical "jim beam" non-logic.


see above.

Indeed.


s/n = 1:100

lightweight.

Much smoke but no fire from the "jim beam" sock puppet.


so still no signal.

tell me tom, why do you bother? it's sort of interesting. an a
sick, pervy "watching a car wreck" kinda way. do you perceive some
kind of benefit from just yapping, without actually saying anything?
can't you just watch tv?

Of more interest to the RBT readership, why do you hide behind a sock
puppet, while constantly sniping at others? What are hiding from or
afraid of?


because it annoys you so excellently!

It annoys me not at all that the "jim beam" sock puppet lacks
credibility.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
The "jim beam" sock puppet wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:
Ben C? wrote:
[...]
There are real engineers working at places like Mavic and
Shimano but
they don't post on RBT (as far as we know) so all we have
to go on is
analysis of the finished products and dubious marketing
material.

Why spend money on engineering when it could be spent on
marketing?

but they /do/ spend it on engineering!!! where do you think
straight pull spokes come from??? where do welded and
machined rims come from??? that **** ain't cheap.

And completely unnecessary.

ah, the crux of a lightweight argument. no details. no
facts. just hand waving and subjectivity!

If the spokes do not break, the wheel stays true and braking is
fine, what more does one get for spending several hundred
dollars more? Bragging rights while the bike is parked at the
coffee shop?

1. i don't drink coffee, so you won't find me there.
2. my bikes get ridden and look like ****. so no pose value
there either.

fabricating straw men, then criticizing that fabrication is
simply lightweight.

So "jim beam" just likes to spend extra money?

eh?



Or is he incapable of building a proper wheel out of conventional
components?

straw man.


Can he not find a competent builder of proper wheels when so many
others do? The mystery of the Bourbon Man deepens.

er, read what i said about local shops and my experience. that's
hardly unique.




Conventional spoked wheels with non-machined rims work just
fine at a much lower cost, thank you.

they work, but not as well, in several regards previously
discussed.

Yes, in "jim beam" world. The rest of us live in the real world.

do your homework. lightweight.

What homework? Reading manufacturer's propaganda and online
reviews of dubious origin?

no, reading the ****ing archives on why these design elements are
beneficial. selective strawman lightweight.



Spending money unnecessarily is not good engineering
practice, but how would "jim beam" know that?

"unnecessarily"??? that's utter bull****. r & d - it's what
keeps good companies alive.

Plenty of companies do just fine selling unnecessary crap
through marketing. A salesman should realize this, no?

more straw men? lightweight.

Open your eyes, "jim".

oh, the irony.



After all, many of the customers are simply interested in
the "latest and greatest" and will be frequently upgrading
for the sake of staying "current", so durability does not
matter too much.

rubbish. see above.

Hit a nerve there "jim"? One only needs to observe the
conformist crowd to see that fashion is the most important
thing.

the defense of the luddite lightweight.

Ah, "jim" can not insult his sales clients, so he vents on RBT.

coming from a guy whose communist rants show real societal
interaction problems, that's rich. all that exhaust-sucking is
getting to you tom. time to switch back to an ordinary.

The poster who constantly resorts to childish insults lectures on
societal interaction! What a hoot!

you're too low to the ground tom. the monoxide is killing your
brain cells.




Remember, conforming to the crowd and having the right look
on the "training" rides is what matters to most of the
riders who purchase things like pre-built Mavic wheels.


no, they buy and ride them because they're much more
reliable than the typical garbage built by their lbs. 5 out
of 6 local shops in my experience couldn't build a decent
wheel if their life depended on it.

There are plenty of sources for decent conventional wheels.
FedEx and UPS will happily deliver the wheels to your door.

One can even buy inexpensive machine built wheels with
quality conventional components, and do the final truing,
tensioning, etc. one's self.

I suppose "jim" likes paying more for wheels with expensive
proprietary parts.

my pre-built mavic and shimano wheels have been fab straight
out of the box. and i'm no lightweight. [unlike you.]

My LBS built wheels have been fine out of the shipping box.


typical tom sherman lightweight non-argument.

Typical "jim beam" non-logic.


see above.

Indeed.


s/n = 1:100

lightweight.

Much smoke but no fire from the "jim beam" sock puppet.


so still no signal.

tell me tom, why do you bother? it's sort of interesting. an a
sick, pervy "watching a car wreck" kinda way. do you perceive some
kind of benefit from just yapping, without actually saying
anything? can't you just watch tv?

Of more interest to the RBT readership, why do you hide behind a sock
puppet, while constantly sniping at others? What are hiding from or
afraid of?


because it annoys you so excellently!

It annoys me not at all that the "jim beam" sock puppet lacks
credibility.


what's the credibility in a name or alumnus when you **** up and get it
wrong? on usenet, credibility is getting it right - and nothing else
matters.

as for you, you don't even say anything, so metaphorically you're a toy
that's forlornly sitting in a corner - at least i have a hand up my ass.

goddamned lightweight.

Ben C wrote:
On 2008-04-26, jim beam wrote:
Ben C wrote:
[...]
But Brandt _does_ appear to claim that residual stress causes spoke
failure and that stabilization works by stress-relieving. That's a step
too far for me.
the thing for me is that it's not like he couldn't go out and acquire
evidence if he really believed it to be true.

Agreed. If it were anyone else they would say, "I know maybe residual
stress is a factor", and people would say "yes, interesting, perhaps",
discuss it a bit, and move on.

But because it's Brandt's pet herring it refuses to die and people go
around believing that "residual stress causes spoke failure".

This is particularly ironic as Brandt is himself the proud slayer of the
previous generation's myth and lore.

Before you catapult from your ad hominem to a broader indictment of the
engineering skills on this forum, you might (at least) familiarize
yourself with what Jobst actually wrote on the subject.

Residual stresses do exist, but they are only one part of the picture.
The debate (here) on this issue has evolved from a denial that residual
stresses existed, to an acceptance that they did, but played no part in
spoke fatigue, to now claiming they may play a minor role. All this is
rather beside the point.

The technique Jobst describes in his book is called "stress relief", not
"residual stress relief". Obviously, residual stress is added to
operational stress to predict fatigue. When a wheel is laced and
tensioned, some areas may be operating near yield. By momentarily
overloading, those areas will yield, and upon removal of the overload,
the (operating) stress will be lowered. That's all. There will be no
effect on any area other than one that's close to yield. That's all he says.

It is impossible to predict, given the various combinations of hubs and
spokes; forming and bending histories, exactly where the critical stress
areas are. There may not even be any. But we can not be sure of that. We
do know that if there are any tension stresses close to yield -- from
all the various sources: residual, spoke tension, bending moment, stress
raisers -- those critical stresses (and only those stresses) will be
lowered and the fatigue life will be improved. Jobst describes this as
"correcting the spoke line at the microscopic level". I don't think I
can improve upon that description.

And for the record, Jobst's book recommends correcting the spoke line
(carefully, and only when needed) after the wheel has been tensioned.
Also, peak residual stresses may exist on the surface after a bend (it
depends on the depth of the plastic/elastic transition) as described
he http://www.doitpoms.ac.uk/tlplib/bea...ng/plastic.php

Also, "direct pull" spokes have been around for a hundred years or so,
like almost all current "innovations", there are reasons for their
historical lack of popularity.

Finally, the "Mavic method" and cruder versions of stress relief have
been around for many years. Jobst never claimed to have invented wheel
stress relieving, only to have explained it and devised a better way to
do it. As for the claim that the benefit of these exercises is only to
provide "bedding in", I'd think it should be obvious (even after
building only a few wheels) that the final stresses in a wheel are
something of a crap shoot, not guaranteed to be improved or worsened by
bedding in.

All this straw man bashing could be avoided by simply reading the book.
Do you critique all books without reading them?