amorrow

Is this possible? Can I lace an 18 hole hub one (1x) cross? I don't think so, because it has nine (uneven number) spokes per side. It might be possible if I put all the spoke heads in or out, but I can't alternate the heads. I have an 18h hub and an 18h rim. I would radial lace it, but shimano does not waranty their hubs for radial lacing. Am I crazy?

The worst part of this story - I put all the dimensions into Sheldon Brown's spoke calculator, had the spokes cut to length, and now I don't think I can use them. Grr.

jsmithepa

They don't guarantee, but does it say "compatible?" If yer light rider, maybe OK. Radial so much cooler!

amorrow

No, it says it's not recommended. I know it can be done and has been done, but I already cut the spokes to go one cross.

jsmithepa

So another 18 NEW spokes is gonna set u back like what $10 bux? Wanna sell that hub to me? what brand is it.

urbanknight

18 spoke wheels are meant to be laced radially. You could do a crow's foot pattern with 18 spokes if you want.

amorrow

Looks like I will cutting some new spokes. I don't know why I never thought of this.

The funny part is that Shimano made both Ultegra and DA hubs with 18 holes, and includes a little warning that Shimano does not warranty their hubs if laced radially. That would make these hubs, according to Shimano, useless. Interesting. Mine is ultegra. They're on nashbar for something like $18.

urbanknight

Can you recut the ones you have? Radial ones are shorter than 1x.

Oh and thanks for the heads up. I'm on the look out for deals on good hubs to build up a light set of racing wheels. 24 0x front, 28 2x rear on Velocity Escape or 18/20 0x front, 24 2x rear on Kinlin tubulars.

Soil_Sampler

cut the spokes down and lace it up.

https://bike.shimano.com/publish/cont...e-hb_road.html

saying it is radial compatible and that 18h hole hub is aero type,
would give me the green light!

jsmithepa

Sometimes the warnings are for "cover butt" for one-size-fits-all, reason I asked how much u weight.

For low spokes count though, I would think a "stronger" rim is recommended, like at least a semi-aero, regardless of lacing pattern. People correct me if am wrong.

jsmithepa

WHERE?

Not on their website.

DannoXYZ 

Close-outs. Not that hard to find Shimano front-hubs for that price.

As for 1x, that's worthless really and looks really crappy. That's because the spoke-angle leaving the flange won't be that significantly different than radial and will still pull outwards on the flange.

urbanknight

Even more crappy when you have one spoke left out, as is the case in an 18 hole hub.

Joshua A.C. New

Danno, that might be true of more common hubs like 32 or 36 hole ones, but I only ever see low spoke count hubs for well over what I can afford. If you know something, link us up!

jsmithepa

Yeah, tons of 32/36H. But this thread is 18H SPECIFIC. That's all we've been talking about. Is your Google better than my Google?

operator

There's a reason for that.

MnHPVA Guy

No problem; Just put all the trailing spokes on the left side and all the leading spokes on the right. (Vice-versa in the southern hemisphere)

Seriously, recumbent builders do this fairly often, skipping every other pair of holes in a 36h rim. I've never heard of anyone having problems. I even did it x3 with an old high flange hub. That put so much torque in the skinny barrel of the hub that the spoke holes lined up. This was on a commuter that got a lot of rough use. I got 4 trouble free years out of it before the rim split due to sidewall wear.

dabac

That can twist a hub right off if you don't watch the spoke tension, but maybe it'll work for a low spoke count wheel.

BCRider

I can only see great harm from an all leading on one side and all trailing on the other. The torque taken by the spool of the hub would be incredable. At least you added the north and south hemisphere to indicate the satire...

Radial would work but am I the only person that thinks radial has been done to death? But with only 9 spokes on each side you can't use a regular leading and lagging pattern where they would all be in pairs since you've got an odd number perside.

How about something like this diagram? There's 3 radial spokes and 3 crossed pairs. Only the one side is showing on the left. On the right you see the whole wheel with the radials on the opposite side aligned with the the crossed pairs of the original side. Of course you'll need to buy two sizes of spokes for the front and 4 for the rear if you try this. However it sure adds some intrest rather than the usual radial lacing. But either way there's no way to do a typical 1, 2, or 3 cross pattern since you require an even number of holes on each side.

PS- In thinking a little more about this I'd still do it but I would not be surprised if the spoke tensions end up being a little different for the radials vs the crossed spokes. Or perhaps they'll all average out and be the same.... Hmmmmmm.

DannoXYZ 

Suzue track hubs are plentiful and cheap. You can even replace the cartridge bearing with super-smooth grade-00 ones if you want. They also have the thicker flanges that makes radial-lacing easy. The only way I've found to have decent tangential angle of the spokes using 1x is a crow's foot pattern (the single radial-spoke is on the opposite flange, it doesn't go through the cross):

BCRider

That the same as I showed in my sketch. Yep, I definetly think it's got more sex appeal than simple radial lacing.

Danno, does it have any tension differences you can easily see between the radial and crossed spokes? Or was I worrying about nothing?

DannoXYZ 

The pulling tension between the radial and crossed spokes are actually the same. If it wasn't I'd have a triangular-shaped wheel!

What some people get confused with tension is "lateral stiffness". That's really what the tensionmeters measure, the lateral deflection of the spoke. However, thicker 14g spokes deflect less for the same pulling tension as 15g or 15/16g DB spokes. Same differences with material, alloy spokes deflect differently than steel than carbon.Thus the various different scales on the gauge, or different look-up tables that convert the gauge's deflection scale to actual tension.

In addition to the thickness-to-deflection or materiel differences, the length of a spoke also causes variations in lateral-deflection; longer spokes will deflect more for the same tension, compared to shorter spokes. This really throws off the "hand-gauge" of squeezing parallel spokes and trying to "feel" the tension. It also throws of the pitch of a plucked spoke. Longer crossed spokes will have a lower tone than shorter radial spokes of exactly the same tension.

So nothing to worry about as far as tension-differences between the radial vs. crossed spokes in a crows-foot pattern. I've used the above wheel for 6-years in track racing without any problems. Have had guys crash on top of the wheel as well as sticking their feet into it. A similar wheel on my road training-bike didn't fare so well. But then parked cars aren't very forgiving when you rear-end them because you're oogling the ladies..

BCRider

Thanks Danno. Nice stuff to know.

Mind you it's helping out the OP but I don't see myself lacing up any 18's anytime soon. I'm just not really an 18 spoke sort of guy.

DannoXYZ 

Yeah, the weight-savings and aero-drag advantages simply do not justify the headaches of 18-hole wheels. There's really no aero-drag savings and taking 30g off a wheel simply isn't worth the decreased strength and reliability. In order to regain a lot of that lost strength, you end up having to use a much heavier rim to be of similar durability to a 32/36-hole wheel.