Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg) - Mavic Open Sport?

I was looking at some rims for a "backup" wheelset for the commuter, and saw the Open Sports. Are these as tough as the always-recommended Open Pros? Or should I pony up the cash for Open Pros and move the current wheelset to "backup" duty?

TIA!

What are the Open Sports laced to and what do they cost? For a bit over $200 you can have the ever dependable Ultegra/Open Pro combo.

I can lace them to whatever, that was going to be my next question :). I was thinking of Ultegra and 14 guage spokes, then having the LBS build 'em.

I also notice performance sells a pre-made combo like that, but it's only 32h.

The open sport rim may actually be stronger than the open pro because of the 2 round extrusions within the box structure. They are heavier because of this. They do not have the welded joint, just sleaved, thus the lower price per rim. Most loaded touring bike builders would recoment the open sport over the open pro as weight carrying ability is prefered for this application.
If you carry this ever further, the CXP 22 may be stronger still as it combines the extrusions with a deeper v rim. The increased depth of the cross section may make the rim able to carry even more weight withoud deflection.

Interesting... see I'm not currently concerned about weight, anything has to be lighter than the MTB's I've been riding :). It sounds like either of those are pretty killer.

Now the other question, XT hubs or Ultegra? The bike currently has a 8 spd cartridge with a Deore RD (Trek 7.3FX). I'm guessing that limits the options of hubs..

The hub choice is sort of dictated by the spacing between the rear dropouts. Traditional road bikes are presently spaced 130mm in the rear. Traditional mountain bikes are 135mm. All fronts are 100mm. Many of the hybreds like the Trek 7.3 are spaced for the mountain bike rear even though they are fitted with 700c wheels. This will again help to make a stronger wheel for weight carrying. The extra spacing provides a slightly wider base for the spokes and helps to make up for the inherent bad angle of the drive side spokes. Measure your frame between the dropouts to confirm the spacing. ST for 135 or Ultegra for 130.

Just to confuse the issue, some hybreds are spaced 132.5 so that either hub can be used.

I went with a set of wheels with 130 spacing for my Trek 7300 and it is kind of a pain to put them in as the dropouts are much wider than the normal road bike. It takes a little bit of effor to get them in place. If I had it to do over, I would have gone with a hub that was better suited for my bike. Don't get me wrong they have been outstanding wheels and true as the day I got them, but just a little tougher to put back into place.

Theory has it that aluminium frames say ouch if they have to be squeezed or opened by 5mm to fit wheels. Of course the manufacturers who make 132.5 bikes or wheels have no problem with a 2.5mm squeeze so how important is the theory????????

Steel bikes can be operated over this distance without too much trouble. In fact if you read the Sheldon Brown articles he has a method to perminantly alter this distance on a steel frame. Not to be done on Aluminium though.

Heh, the '07 FXs are a very interesting breed. If you put one up next to a Pilot, you see that the geometry is quite similar. In fact, damn near identical. Although I will say that, after riding a pilot, the ride is a tad different :).

Anyway, some searching on the Internets have found the rear spacing to be 130mm. So it's downright interesting that they threw a 8 speed cassette on it, and a deore RD. Although it shares the frame geometry all the way up the FX line, with the upper end models having complete road drivetrains. Am I going to have any issues running a 8 speed cassette on a Ultegra hub? I'd rather not change the entire drivetrain, and really I don't need a 9 or 10 speed rear cassette.

Well it looks like Ultegra hubs and 14 guage wheelsmith spokes. With that in mind, they'll become my primary wheels. Now... Sport or Pro? I lean toward sport for durability, but if there's something huge I'm missing with a upgrade to pro... :)

Whatever else you decide, use butted spokes, not straight-gauge. Wheels last longer with butted spokes. Seems counter-intuitive, but it's true. Thus spake Jobst Brandt.

they were standard on my 2006 JTS. With 38 tires, they've been flawless over 600 tough miles.

Interestingly, on the JTS they are on road hubs (105s), so i went with ultegras on the open pros i got for road slicks

I assembled a set of wheels with the Open Sports (formerly MA-3) and 32 DT 2.0-1.8-20 spokes laced 3x fore and aft on Ultegra hubs to be used for light (supported) touring. They are on a Trek 1000 with an 8 speed Sora drivetrain. They have performed flawlessly under my 6'1" and 204 lbs self for well over 1000 miles. Very easy to build with as they seem to be less "flexy or picky" during building and truing process than Open Pros.
Hope this helps..........

Whatever else you decide, use butted spokes, not straight-gauge. Wheels last longer with butted spokes. Seems counter-intuitive, but it's true. Thus spake Jobst Brandt.

I just had a set of 36 spoke wheels built with Deep V rims on Deore hubs. The builder used DT Champion 2.0 spokes. Is that good? He assured me that they were PLENTY strong enough.

Matty in Brooklyn

Ooh.. Nashbar has a Dura Ace 36h rear hub for $60 (down from $220!!!). I'm hesitant to go weight weenie on it, but that price is hard to ignore!

Damn... this biking thing is addictive :)

Overall the most recommended rims for Clydes seem to be the 36 hole, 14-15-14 gauge butted spokes:

Velocity DeepV
mavic CXP 22
mavic CXP 33

I am using the cheaper Weinmann DPX rims since several weeks and they seem to be very sturdy,too.

If you can find anybody building wheels with "DT Swiss Onyx" hubs instead of the shimanos that would be a plus, too.

Overall the most recommended rims for Clydes seem to be the 36 hole, 14-15 gauge spokes:

Velocity DeepV
mavic CXP 22
mavic CXP 33


Ok, I am confused again: What does 14-15 gauge mean compared to 2.0 which is what my spokes are? Is this two different measuring systems? And which would be stronger: 14-15, or 2.0?

It sucks being clueless sometimes!

Matty in Brooklyn

Sorry Mr. bdinger, I guess I took over your thread here. I didn't mean it, HONEST!:o

Please forgive me.

Matty in Brooklyn

Ok, I am confused again: What does 14-15 gauge mean compared to 2.0 which is what my spokes are? Is this two different measuring systems? And which would be stronger: 14-15, or 2.0?

It sucks being clueless sometimes!

Matty in Brooklyn
You're not clueless - you're on the learning curve. Everyone is or was in the same place. Most stuff on bikes is common sense, once you know a few basics. But you have to learn those basics from somewhere or someone, and not everything is intuitively obvious. Don't be afraid to ask those "dumb" questions in BF (at least not in the Clydesdale, 50+ or Touring sections - folks are pretty supportive there).

I believe that 14/15/14 gauge is the same as 2.0/1/8/2.0 for spokes - English system v. metric system. As for your new wheels, they should be fine. 36 spokes and a V-section rim should serve you well.

For future reference, a lot of places assume that straight gauge spokes make a stronger wheel than butted spokes because they figure that more metal means stronger spokes. (I have had wrenches at shops argue this with me.) They are correct in that the middle portion of the spoke is stronger with more metal. They are incorrect in that that does not mean that the *wheel* is stronger. In fact, the wheel is stronger with butted spokes for the reason I stated before - butted spokes allow some of the force that would otherwise flex the bend in the spoke (where spokes almost always break) to the middle of the straight portion of the spoke (where breakage almost never occurs). That also means a slightly more "flexy" wheel, but I doubt that it is enough to notice except on the smoothest of surfaces in the most strenous of applications.

And yes, butted spokes cost more. There is a guy over in the Touring section who swears by triple butted spokes made by DT (I think), which are more expensive yet. The diference per spoke is not much. Multiply that difference by 72 spokes and the price difference is noticable. In any event, I think butted spokes are worth the investment. They may not prolong the life of the wheel, but you will probably break and replace fewer spokes, which means fewer times haqving to retrue the wheel over its useful life.

Now aren't you sorry you asked?

Now aren't you sorry you asked?

Actually, I am not sorry I asked. What you said made alot of sense. I wish the guy who just built my wheels told me about the butted spokes. I would have surely coughed up the extra coinage.

I am only sorry that I asked in this thread. I am new to this site, and I think I stole the thread from bdinger.

I hope he forgives me.

Matty in Brooklyn

Actually this has been a good thread for Clydes as the needs here are different than the stock answers you will get in many other parts of the forum.

Remember rule 1 for clydes. Bicycles are designed by in large for 150 lb riders. Advice for this group does not translate well into clyde bikes. Wheel strength is very important to large riders. Lightweight race parts by in large do not have the reserve strenght necessary for large riders.

Even among our group there are big differences. For example I joke about myself being a Clyde light as I ride between 205 and 225 depending on the time of year. I can get away with carefully planned out parts designed for the lighter riders.

I do not think that my style of bike is suitable at 300 or 400 lbs. At those points, suspension forks and carbon fiber parts are probably no longer useful. Even lightweight aluminium double butted handlebars are questionable.

The point is to share information about what works and why.

I assembled a set of wheels with the Open Sports (formerly MA-3) . . . .
I did not know that the MA-3 had been rebadged as the Open Sport. Knowing that, I would say that Open Sports are perfectly acceptable for at least as many Clydes as Open Pro's are. Cheaper, too. A bit heavier, though, if memory serves.

I did not know that the MA-3 had been rebadged as the Open Sport. Knowing that, I would say that Open Sports are perfectly acceptable for at least as many Clydes as Open Pro's are. Cheaper, too. A bit heavier, though, if memory serves.


I ordered "trusty old standard" MA-3s and received Open Sports. They are not interchangable in spoke length calculators due to diferent ERDs. IMO the Super Spoerts are excellent rims and 32 hole/spoke are suficient/ample for clydes. The 700-28 Continental Ultra Gatorskins (I ride exclusively) are extremely easy (fingertip) to mount on the Open Sport rims.

I did not have any luck with the MA3's 36 hole rims, weighing 250 lbs, I had to true them quite often and after about 1000 miles several eylets just ripped through the rim. AFAIK Mavic recommends something like 200 lbs max weight.
Hope you have more luck!