|Radial lacing a rear wheel||mr_spin|
Oct 9, 2001 6:57 AM
|I'm really talking about half-radial spoking a rear wheel: radial on the left, 3x on the right. It's supposed to make the wheel a lot more durable. I guess it looks cool too.
Has anyone here ever done this?
I've built 3x wheels, and I figured it would be fairly easy to do a half-radial. But the more I think about it, the more complicated it becomes.
The first issue is that it seems that I think I have to build the entire right side of the wheel before even starting on the left side. Otherwise, doing the crossing pattern will be kind of tricky to do.
The second issue is that I'm not sure if the spokes should be inbound or outbound on the left (radial) side.
Anyone have any suggestions?
By the way, I have Ksyriums, and what's curious about them is that the right side is radial, and left is crossed! That would seem to break all the rules.
|re: Radial lacing a rear wheel||cyclopathic|
Oct 9, 2001 7:37 AM
|well you wanna do heads out on left side to reduce dishing
Mavic is not the first to radial lace right side Spinergy was making Spox that way for how many years now? The idea behind it is that you move drive side to left and equalize load (left side spokes have less tension due to dishing). Driving forces are applied to spokes with less tension, so less spoke pulling.
Spox use a specially design hub with free hub attached to left side. Mavic I believe just relies on stiff hub shell. I would suspect almost any hub (with exception of 3 piece or some extra light hubs) would work the same way, but I never got my hands to build one.
As far as I can tell there's no real advantage of radial lace over conventional 3x wheels. Fully radial front with heads in would be laterally stiffer, but it would ride harsher too.
|re: Radial lacing a rear wheel||JS|
Oct 9, 2001 7:48 AM
|I have built plenty of wheels with radial non-drive three cross drive lacing without a problem. They really are pretty easy, it's just like you said, build one side completely then lace the radial side. I have also built radial front and rear with spoke heads in and heads out and have not noticed much difference but heads in gives more dish so may be stronger. Ksyriums and some Spynergy's cross the spokes on the opposite side of the drive which is fine just as long as one side is crossed to control hub windup. Incidently I have a friend who has built a few conventional wheels with this layout ( radial drive side, two cross non-drive ) just for grins and says they work fine but with the radial spokes laced heads in the derailleur rubs them on some bikes so lacing heads out is preferable.|
|Bad reasons||Kerry Irons|
Oct 9, 2001 4:36 PM
|Nothing "wrong" with the design, but it does not increase wheel durability, or anything else, for that matter. The main reason(s) to do this are ease of cleaning of the radial spokes and the "cool" look, if you like it. Every wheel I've ever built has used the "spoke one side, then the other" approach, so this is not an outside the envelope procedure. In bound or outbound will only slightly change the tension on the spoke (higher tension on the spoke if the "head out" configuration is used).|
|re: Radial lacing a rear wheel||Woof the dog|
Oct 10, 2001 1:19 AM
|40 % more stresses on something I can't remember. I just read about this yesterday. Someone here have a link in one of the threads. What if you crack a hub flange too, you know.
|re: Radial lacing a rear wheel||cyclequip|
Oct 10, 2001 5:21 AM
|You can use this lacing pattern as you describe, to get the benefits you suggest - less spoke breakage - common on the non-drive rear spokes because they run 60-65% less tension than drive-side. Heads in gives greater head angle but greater stiffness than heads out. The real benefit is derived only with top-quality, deep-section rims where overall spoke tension can be raised to the limit.|| |