fietsbob

... 3 cross in 32 .. My Koga Rohloff Trekking Bike was Laced by the factory like that,

so there was a near zero chance of spokes pulling thru the hub flange edge..

as they were pulling towards the opposite spoke ..






Q: Did Ratrod ask how many years his 'expert' had been working as a Mechanic , building wheels?

Timmi

Oh, it didn't even occur to me, to even dare think of doing cross-4 on anything less than 36-hole.
Thanks for clarifying that for all. Glad we won't mislead anyone.
(Although this thread is aged, I stumbled upon it today, as I am lacing a 36hole X4 for the first time, and was googling if it would be much different than X3 which I've always done (and X2 on rare occasions).

There were some myths persisting here, about radial versus cross lacing, and I found this very interesting, scientific, finite-element analysis using Catia (which they design and stress-test airplanes and rockets with).
https://www.williamscycling.com/asset...e%20Lacing.pdf
Long-story short, more with more crosses is better (their model used only 28 spokes, recommended as 3X, so one can conclude that 4X on a 36 hole has it's advantages).

FBinNY 

Scientific analysis is fine, but when analyzing the results you have to apply 2 steps of logic.

1- is it accurate and a fair representation of my real world problem? For example, science may tell you that one pattern is torsionally, radially, or axially more rigid, but which is of concern to you?


2- Is the "proven" difference significant is the scheme of things. It's one thing to prove there;s a difference, but something else entirely to decide if that difference is meaningful when weighed against other factors. This is where judgement and experience come into play. I build various wheels with different patterns to "optimize" them for various purposes, such as track, touring, road racing, expected pavements, etc. But I don't deceive myself into believing that subtle differences, ie. 3x vs. 4x, are meaningful in the real world.

BF is full of very heated debates over these niggling differences, but I compare them to arguing over pennies on a million dollar deal. So, 3x or 4x, whichever you prefer, or whatever the spokes on hand dictate.

SquidPuppet

You may not get a response, since he posted that TEN YEARS ago.

Timmi

Mock as much as you like. As I mentioned, I landed here this week in 2015, as I was searching for more information on cross-4.
And as the world turns, I may not be the last to do a similar search and land on this thread.
So, as I already mentioned in another recent post, these recent posts were for the benefit of those to come.

Timmi

I completely understand where you are coming from. And I have been on both sides of many debates of a similar nature, in different fields. Life experience shows that most are full of hot air. Perhaps you would like to take a look at the link to the PDF that I posted. It is interesting. For once, we have an analysis that at least attempts to figure things out. And their conclusions completely make sense. I was ready to debunk their report, find flaws (and I did), but the biggest part of their conclusions are very logical. For example, that a wheel, under torsion, loses more energy with radial spokes than crossed, is totally logical. How can you argue with that?
There are, of course, a few flaws. They did the analysis on 28-hole, calling it "many", and probably should have done it on someting more common, like 32 or 36 (better for the cross-4 if they were looking into that). And I am also skeptical that the bottom of the wheel deforms so much, because I suspect that the tire deforms and the rim might not. But that wouldn't change the final conclusions.
If you take away scientific analysis, you are left with what? Just arguments by different people who don't actually really know for sure, where each other's intuition can be debated. ...and then there is that ever-present marketingp-hype... so much BS to sell you THEIR products and charge you more for them, and often, there is not basis for it and sometimes useless "innovations" just to render other stuff obsolete.

SquidPuppet

Mocking? OK, if you say so.

rmfnla

Yeah, but he's still a regular here so odds are good he will weigh in on this at some point...