cyccommute 

Have you ever experience a rim failure? I have, many times. A rim failure is a slow failure that won't leave you walking unless you slam it into a curb and actually fold the rim over. But even and infinite number of spokes is going to protect your wheel in that case.

Even when rims crack at the spoke hole, crack the inner wall in the same plane as the spoke and have the brake track fail, the wheel is ridable enough to get home 10 or 20 miles. Even spoke failures can be nursed for a long ways if they have to be. I nursed one for 100 miles with a touring load from Lolo Pass in Montana to Kooskia, ID.

Even spoke failure is a slow failure. A spoke can pop quickly but the wheel can still be okay. If you have a number of spokes break, then the wheel is toast. You still aren't going to have to resort to walking.

cyccommute 

Thank you.

MRT2

I suppose you can give it a shot. My question is, is 229 lbs your maximum, or minimum weight? The reason I ask is, many Clydes, myself included fluctuate in weight. More than once, I have put on 20 lbs in seemingly a blink of an eye, only to drop the weight over the course of a summer.

229 lbs on a 28 spoke wheel seems to be pushing it a bit, IMO. If 229 lbs becomes 250 or 260, then you could be asking for trouble.

FBOATSB

Me too. I am currently 300+/- and you will have to pry my tubular steel 36 spoke wheels from my cold dead fingers. They're perfect for my 40 LB bike which I have no doubt will last the rest of my life.

puddinlegs

Or you can carry a spoke wrench with you and make a quick adjustment that will get you home without any wobble at all.

pdlamb

After building (and rebuilding) half a dozen wheels, I probably could adjust the wheel enough to get my back home. I get the feeling I'm in the minority by that metric.

volosong

Posted this morning at Velo News.

Technical FAQ: Clydesdale road wheels - VeloNews.com

ExtremeSquared

Just make sure that spoke tension is proportional to your mass. There's a tension range between flexing spoke failure and static spoke/rim failure that you must stay within. The higher the supported mass, the narrower this range becomes, unfortunately. If the range becomes too narrow, you must increase spoke count. Some wheelbuilders seem to overlook this.

cyccommute 

This Velo News article admirably discusses the dynamics of spoke unloading and reloading and then completely misses the point. They even discuss the effect of this unloading and reloading has on the spoke in this part

and then completely miss the implications of what happens and what to do to remedy the situation.

The snapping back of the tension on the spoke can damage the rim but, more importantly, it can damage the spoke which is a far more serious component to damage. The bend on the spoke at the elbow makes the spoke more vulnerable to breakage and ultimately failure.

I also take issue with their explanation of why double butted spokes should be used. The middle of a double butted spoke is elastic and does allow for the center section to stretch, particularly during the rebound phase of retensioning but the head of a double butted spoke is the same size as the head of a corresponding straight gauge spoke. In other words, a 2.0mm straight spoke has the same head as a 2.0/1.8/2.0 spoke with similar strength.

Finally, after discussing the dynamics of spokes, the article misses the forest for the trees and discusses hubs and rims and how to protect them while completely ignoring the third critical component. Spokes are far more important than to be left as an afterthought.

chaadster

Hahaha!

Dude, you have to know how you sound trying to call the Tech Editor for VeloNews, Lennard Zinn, the same Zinn of Zinn Cycles, one of the premier builders of custom rides for clydes, to task for not understanding the "implications" of what he's saying. Ridiculous, would be the word that comes to my mind.

And not because Zinn is an infallible saint, which he ain't. But when he brings in respected industry pros to comment on the questions, as he does with Sawiris from Wheelbuilder in this case, and they back up his call, you gotta factor that in and ask the question, "who am I to argue?"

So, when it comes to "missing the forest for the trees," I think you'd make one damn good lumberjack, sir.

cyccommute 

I work with experts in many fields every day. I am even something of an expert in my own field of study. Just because you are an "expert" doesn't mean you can't miss an important point. It happens all the time. It's part of discovery. Sometimes it is even glaringly obvious after the fact. Zinn and Sawiris may be experts on wheel building and bike building but that doesn't mean that they are all knowing.

"Who am I to argue?" I'm someone who has made an observation and done some tests and found a different way of doing things. A real "expert" is open minded about new possibilities. Someone who is not an expert will say "but the experts say" and never try anything new.

sstorkel

Zinn is primarily a technical writer these days. He does not, to the best of my knowledge, have degrees in materials science nor mechanical engineering. I've seen people with degrees in materials science and mechanical engineering point out mistakes in his writing on more than one occasion. As you yourself point out: he is not infallible.

Note that while Rich Sawiris is a mechanical engineer (BSME Pomona College, 8 years working at Toyota and Hyundai in non-bicycle related positions), he provides product advice rather than an engineering analysis of whether Zinn is correct or not. The advice he gives in this piece is, at best, incomplete. Notice that he provides recommendations for rims and expensive hubs only. Even if you don't think spokes are the most important part of a wheel, you have to admit that trying to build a 32-spoke wheel without any spokes is going to be a bit futile...

chaadster

So the opposing camp is Absurdity? Hahaha!

chaadster

Ah hahaha! I ride (and race) 1372gm, 18h/24h tubeless...as a clyde.

Jarrett2

90 posts in, who won?

chaadster

Rims won.

chaadster

Obviously.

bikemig 

This is a heck of a thread. I don't know anything about the science or physics behind wheels.

I did wrench on bikes a lot when mavic gel 280s were being sold. The experience with those rims and heavier riders was not good regardless of whether the wheels were built with double butted spokes or not. That's a rule of thumb or a generalization from my experience and those of others I knew back in the day who were a heck of a lot better mechanics and wheel builders than I was (and am).

Take it for what it's worth but I wouldn't ride those rims if I were you regardless of which spokes you use and regardless of which mechanic rebuilds those wheels.

dr_lha

Up North

210-220 here on DA C35 - 16/21 thousands of kms no issues.

RR3

GEL280 were race day only wheels for light riders, period. Forget about them. Weak rims.

It should be noted that Zinn was responding to a specific reader's question and not writing a full article, as if he doesn't know spoke are part of building wheels. Ya, he missed it. He could have just left it at......

I have well over 10,000 trouble free miles on a set of 28H/20H wheels that were purchased at 240 lbs although i am no longer fat.

CdaleNike21

So my new ride has 16/20 spoke count, and I'm 220 and dropping. Should be good right?

himespau 

Yeah, but if you're going with a relatively beefy deeper rim anyway, can't you consider having a few less spokes? I get needing beefy rims to make up for few spokes, but if you want aero and aluminum and are going to end up with a 31 mm deep 500g rim that has a nice flat bed for the nipples, why not consider going 28 spokes if that opens up some hub possibilities that aren't available in 36?

Drew Eckhardt 

That should be fine.

dr_lha

You'll be good until you're not.