|Radial drive-side lacing||slasher|
Jun 24, 2002 4:56 PM
|Has anyone built wheels with radial drive-side lacing, like Kysriums? It seems crossed drive/radial nondrive wheels are far more common, but you'd think mavic must have some reason for doing the opposite. I'm thinking of building a rear wheel with record hubs/28 sapim CXRay spokes/aeroheads, and was thinking about doing radial drive side/2 cross nondrive. Will this work???|
Jun 24, 2002 6:00 PM
Force vectors and stresses are increased when you go radial. Drive side is already under much higher tension than the non-drive side. You could do it with some beefy spokes and beefy hubs (ala Ksyrium), but what are you trying to accomplish. Mavic had to do it do the requirments of holding the large aluminum spokes. Radial lacing really accomplishes very little and is mostly a fashion statement. You'll have people argue that it's lighter due to less spoke, but then you're incresing stress b/c a given rim deflection has less spoke to aborb the change in length and the wheel is not as laterally stiff (a good thing).
Your formula is probably a good approach to failing the hub or the spokes or both. Read some books on wheel building if you want to avoid an expensive mistake. Many have gone before you - no need to reinvent the wheel.
Jun 25, 2002 10:53 PM
|As we've gone through this conversation several times in its assorted variations, radial lacing doesn't confer any seriously good benefits outside of the visual appeal. Under the most optimistic estimates you'll still get less than two-spokes' worth in weight reduction max for the front wheel, less than one for the rear, all while stressing the hubs toward premature failure (see Jim P's post) and of course voiding the warranty. Chris King used to be the only company that warrantied their hubs for radial lacing. Last year even they stopped. Why? The overwhelming majority that failed were all radially laced. Yet another reason to avoid it.|
|Does Phil still allow Radial??????? n/m||curlybike|
Jun 26, 2002 8:19 AM
|re: Radial drive-side lacing||Matno|
Jun 24, 2002 6:01 PM
|I'm no expert, and I don't have the Kysriums, but the Mavic wheels I do have (which are actually radial everywhere except the drive side) have specially designed hubs reinforced to withstand the radial lacing's unique torque. I would check with Campy to see what they have to say about radially lacing their hubs. I know Shimano doesn't warranty radial laced hubs - not that it necessarily matters. Far as I'm concerned, it seems downright weird to do 2-cross on the non-drive side if you're doing radial on the drive side. Non-drive spokes get so little pressure on them anyway that you might as well make a fully radial wheel that will look cooler. My 2 cents. (Which may be worth less than that!)|
|re: Radial drive-side lacing||curlybike|
Jun 25, 2002 5:57 AM
|Campy will not warranty a radially laced hub front or rear, unless they make it a wheel themselves.|
|Record hubs probably have greater offset disparity...||Quack|
Jun 25, 2002 6:59 AM
|If you are hoping to duplicate the Ksyrium design, I would recommend getting a hold of a hub that has a straight pull non-drive side with spokes leaving at 60-90 degrees with minimal dish. I am not intimately familiar with the Ksyrium design but from the pictures, the rear wheel appears to have two cross non-drive spokes and near equal offset of the flanges. I would assume that by pulling the left flange in toward the center, the wheel would not only be more aerodynamic but would also allow the non-drive side spokes to play a greater part in the torque transfer to the rim. Higher tension in the non-drive would also likely yield a stiffer wheel and help to offset any negative spoke shift effects that radial spoking the drive side might have due to acceleration and braking.
Using conventional hubs, I would stay away from radial on the drive side. But then again, I've never actually tried it. I've always liked having the spokes on the drive side leave the flange at 90 degree angles like 3x provides. Maybe do 2x drive side and radial non-drive rear and 2x front. Or buy hubs that are designed for radial loads and go radial on the front.
|My friend has done two wheels just like that.||JS|
Jun 25, 2002 7:31 AM
|Two caveats, first, make sure you build heads out as when building heads in the spokes catch the derailleur cage when in the largest cog.....bad. Also, he had one wheel flange explode on the drive side of a Hugi 240, I don't know if it was because of the radial drive side lacing but I'm not sure I'd want to take that chance.|
Jun 25, 2002 7:51 AM
|I wish somebody would give me a reason for this minimum cross fad. I just don't get it.
As I understand it, the idea behind the radial spokes on the drive side is to move the pulling tension from the heavily tensioned right side spokes to the more lightly tensioned spokes on the left side. That doesn't really make much sense to me. If I were going to lace up a set for myself today, it would be 3 cross both sides front and rear.
|Isn't choice a great thing?||JS|
Jun 25, 2002 8:46 AM
|I can't understand why people ride heavy steel frames but I guess that's just me.|
|Yes, even the bad ones. (nm)||grzy|
Jun 25, 2002 3:04 PM
|No, you will have problems with that wheel eventually nm||sprockets2|
Jun 25, 2002 12:57 PM
|re: Radial lacing with Record hubs||JimP|
Jun 25, 2002 1:36 PM
|I built up a set of Campy Record hubs with radial front and radial non-drive, 3 cross drive side wheels a few years ago. These hubs lasted one season! I noticed what looked like little bumps opposite the radial laced spoke holes. They were little deformed bumps where the spoke was trying to pull out of the hub. They were beautiful Italian Campy hubs, but too soft for the stress of radial lacing. I'm glad I noticed this before a spoke pulled out of the hub.|| |