Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Touring Have a dream to ride a bike across your state, across the country, or around the world? Self-contained or fully supported? Trade ideas, adventures, and more in our bicycle touring forum.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 02-03-06, 10:51 AM   #1
Bekologist
totally louche
Thread Starter
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Posts: 18,025
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
48 spokes in front overkill?

Going to buy a Dynohub this spring for my heavy touring bike. I do a lot of rough roading it and gravel fire roads on my tours, and a 48 hole Schmidt dynohub is mighty tempting.

The question I have is, does anyone think 48 spokes are overkill on a front wheel for a single touring bike?

I'd be matching up to a 48 spoke wheel in the back. I just wonder if 48 in front is just way over the top.

Any input?
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-06, 10:55 AM   #2
cyclintom
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 2,535
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 61 Post(s)
WAY overkill. 40 spokes are common on the front of tandems and I've rarely seen a broken tandem front wheel. Lots of broken back wheels though.
cyclintom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-06, 11:40 AM   #3
CdCf
Videre non videri
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Bikes: 1 road bike (simple, light), 1 TT bike (could be more aero, could be lighter), 1 all-weather commuter and winter bike, 1 Monark 828E ergometer indoor bike
Posts: 3,208
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'd love to have 48 spokes both back and front, if only rims and hubs for it were easily available here. They're not. Not even 40 is to be found.
CdCf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-06, 11:42 AM   #4
royalflash
Senior Member
 
royalflash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Munich
Bikes: Lemond Alpe d´Huez, Scott Sub 10, homemade mtb, Radlbauer adler (old city bike), Dahon impulse (folder with 20 inch wheels), haibike eq xduro
Posts: 1,372
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bekologist
I just wonder if 48 in front is just way over the top.

Any input?
not if you happen to be a blue whale otherwise very probably
__________________
only the dead have seen the end of mass motorized stupidity

Plato

(well if he was alive today he would have written it)
royalflash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-06, 11:51 AM   #5
tphelps
Vegan Cyclist
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Central Valley, California
Bikes: Pinarello (2002), Specialized Allez Compe (2000), Specialized Expedition (1983), Zebrakenko Touring (1983), Specialized M-4 Stumpjumper (2001)
Posts: 54
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Most cycletourists consider that custom built wheels with 36 spokes fr/rr to be more than adequate, and 40 rr/36 fr to be pretty much bomb proof on a single touring bike--even on rougher roads. I'd recommend 14/15/14 double-butted ss spokes, as they offer just a wee bit of give under a heavy load, breaking less frequently than straight-gauge spokes.

Best regards,

Ted Phelps
Central Valley, California
tphelps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-06, 12:10 PM   #6
CdCf
Videre non videri
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Bikes: 1 road bike (simple, light), 1 TT bike (could be more aero, could be lighter), 1 all-weather commuter and winter bike, 1 Monark 828E ergometer indoor bike
Posts: 3,208
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I love redundancy!
Did I mention my bike has two front lights (hub dynamo-bulb, battery-LED), to rear lights (two sets of red LEDs), two bells (really only because my first was pretty bad, but when I mounted the new one, I simply let the old one stay on there) and two handle bars! If my fork had had the proper mount for it, I would've had a mechanical disc brake as well in front, together with the rim V-brake.

That, and the fact that I think that wheels look better the more spokes they have!
CdCf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-06, 12:48 PM   #7
Bekologist
totally louche
Thread Starter
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Posts: 18,025
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
We're talking rough stuff. Multiple thousands of feet of descent on golfball sized gravel or worse, ripraff, maybe ride to Alaska or do portions of the Continental Divide trail with it, that type of riding.

I was riding some pretty some heinous descents in the Cascades and Olympic mountains this last year.

I caught myself in the thick of some downhills thinking,
can they make this rubble any larger and still have it considered gravel?

I don't have any pictures of the bad stuff, but here's a road washout, and a rockslide in the process of getting removed from the North Cascades Senic Highway, both summer 2005.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg washout.jpg (87.0 KB, 62 views)
File Type: jpg rockslide.jpg (51.3 KB, 67 views)

Last edited by Bekologist; 02-03-06 at 01:11 PM.
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-06, 01:10 PM   #8
NoReg
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 5,117
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think even a moose can get by with 32 on the front, that is a moose with baggage.

I forget what it is but there is some problem with too many spokes. Of course there are the obvious problems of rotating weight, difficulty finding lots of options, getting replacement parts. But I think there are some direct structural negatives, like drilling extra holes in the rims. I have a feeling part of the problem is that if you put 48 spokes on a rim vs (is it a 32 spokes normal MTB wheel) You either tension it with a lot more energy, thereby enormously increasing the stress on the wheel, or you have each spoke reduced in tension so as to keep things in line. So now you need more spoke angle to make up for the sloppy sploke tension, so you need a 140 rear hub. If you do that on a front hub it's narrow to start with, and you want to use a disc brake also, where you need a lot of tension to deal with the spoke angles. I'm not sure you end up ahead. If you fixate on the one issue: more spokes, you are ahead. But every other factor seems to be a negative.
NoReg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-06, 01:32 PM   #9
kesroberts
Senior Member
 
kesroberts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Worcester, Mass.
Bikes: Several
Posts: 292
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Go for it if that's what you want - the riding you have planned sounds great. I probably wouldn't do it myself since I have never had to even true the 36 spoke stock wheels that came with my bike even after 3 years of pretty hard use.
kesroberts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-06, 01:43 PM   #10
mtnroads
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon and SE Asia
Bikes: Waterford ST-22, Jamis Quest Elite, Jamis Dragon Pro
Posts: 933
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bekologist
We're talking rough stuff. Multiple thousands of feet of descent on golfball sized gravel or worse, ripraff, maybe ride to Alaska or do portions of the Continental Divide trail with it, that type of riding.
Mtn bike. Rigid is fine. I also want to ride the GDMBR, and do some other offroad touring, so I am setting up an old Trek 970 (no susp) for the purpose. Lugged chromo frame, XT components, strong 26" wheels with Conti Town & Country tires, Jandd Exped racks = pretty much bombproof and doesn't weigh much more than my 520. Yes, it is slower on pavement, and the riding position still needs work but it should do the job.
mtnroads is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-06, 01:50 PM   #11
goldener
Banned.
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 658
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
with 48 holes the chance of hub flange breakage is increased.
goldener is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-03-06, 02:09 PM   #12
amaferanga
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Scotland
Bikes:
Posts: 220
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Surely if you think you need 48 on the front then you need more than 48 on the back????

36 front and back on a well built wheel with tough rims (Sun Rhyno, Mavic EX721) can cope with anything.

Its utterly pointless getting a 48 spoke front wheel IMO.
amaferanga is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-06, 02:35 AM   #13
Camel
Caffeinated.
 
Camel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Waltham, MA
Bikes: Waterford 1900, Quintana Roo Borrego, Trek 8700zx, Bianchi Pista Concept
Posts: 1,541
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Yes 48 is overkill. The spoke flanges are also higher on most dynamo hubs, meaning slightly shorter spokes as well. Meaning slightly stronger spokes.

I'd also give using a dyno hub another thought or two if I were you.

I run one on my brevet bike, but am not using one on tour. I've only ridden at night perhaps a handfull of times while on tour. The few times I did, it was for going out after setting up camp, or from a hostel/pension (usually I go for an evening walk, rather than ride). Battery powered LED lights were perfectly fine, for me, in those circumstances.

Now with the multitude of 1-3W luxeun battery powered LED lights available, there is even less of a need for dynohubs on tour. IMO.

Note also that you would need to have a speed >6-10mph for adequate power generation. That would be a bit faster than I would want to go on an unknown trail descent (AT NIGHT) far from support.

Running dual lights off my schmidt sun hub is adequate on paved descent ~15mph, on a clear night. Track/trail would create way too many shadows (IMO), due to the angle with which most generator lights project there beams.

-Now if your using your generator hub to recharge batteries and such, that's a completely different story. More power to you (ha, ha)! Do let folks know how your rig works. I"d be interested in it, as would other's I'm sure.
Camel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-06, 12:22 PM   #14
grolby
Senior Member
 
grolby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BOSTON BABY
Bikes:
Posts: 9,376
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 106 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peterpan1
I think even a moose can get by with 32 on the front, that is a moose with baggage.

I forget what it is but there is some problem with too many spokes. Of course there are the obvious problems of rotating weight, difficulty finding lots of options, getting replacement parts. But I think there are some direct structural negatives, like drilling extra holes in the rims. I have a feeling part of the problem is that if you put 48 spokes on a rim vs (is it a 32 spokes normal MTB wheel) You either tension it with a lot more energy, thereby enormously increasing the stress on the wheel, or you have each spoke reduced in tension so as to keep things in line. So now you need more spoke angle to make up for the sloppy sploke tension, so you need a 140 rear hub. If you do that on a front hub it's narrow to start with, and you want to use a disc brake also, where you need a lot of tension to deal with the spoke angles. I'm not sure you end up ahead. If you fixate on the one issue: more spokes, you are ahead. But every other factor seems to be a negative.
A wheel with more spokes will necessarily have less tension on each spoke. This is not a bad thing. A 48-spoke wheel is stronger than a 36-spoke wheel of like quality. It is simply unnecessarily so. 36 is enough. Rotating mass is also not a problem. Bicycle accelerations are so slow that most roadies are wasting their money to reduce rotating mass by ten grams. It's positively absurd to think that a touring cyclist would want to be at all concerned by rotating mass. It's simply not an issue.
grolby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-06, 04:41 PM   #15
challengea2z
In planning
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Bikes: Revell custom tourer,Kona Stinky,Omega TI,Gaint TCR,Simonchinni,Raliegh ti,S&M Next Gen.
Posts: 81
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
101% over kill not even on my Orange Patriot down hill bike did I use more than 36 spokes, also I only use 36 on my S&M BMX, never felt the need for more spoke, I'm using 32 because Rohloff only make them with 32 and my tourer, and it will be use on and off road, 14 gauge tandem spokes and strong rims that are built well are all you'll need. IMHO I don't think you need more than 36.
challengea2z is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-06, 08:16 PM   #16
vosyer
WATERFORD22
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Seattle
Bikes: Bilenky, Co-Motion, 1969 Paramount, Waterford Adventure Cycle, Waterford rs 22, 1980 Davidson etc.
Posts: 509
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I have watched your posts for a while and I am also in Puget Sound - you really ride some tough stuff an in weather I would not be caught dead in. I agree with everyone that 48 is "slightly" overkill for a single bike - I use the word slightly because if I could find or was willing to pay for 48 hole I would of bought them for my 700c touring bike - instead I have opted for 40 hole on my my 26 inch bike and 40 hole on my 700c bike and on my tandem I ride 48 hole. Also I seen alot of discussion about flanges in this thread - my comment is that 40 or 48 hole hubs take this into consideration as do the rim makers who put out rims for these rubs and most of the postings on the subject have never handled either. Also just as a learning curve make sure the back and front wheels have the same number of holes - I found myself in a circumstance with a 40 front and 48 rear and didn't have a replacement on board when one broke. And as a FYI there are several big guys in Seattle riding 48 hole wheels on their City bikes and are glad they do.
vosyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-06, 12:54 AM   #17
531phile 
I'm Carbon Curious
 
531phile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 2,195
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
I carry 40 pounds of groceries in addition to my 175 pounds with a 32 rear and 32 front. No problems. Almost a year now with this set up.
531phile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-06, 02:55 AM   #18
NoReg
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 5,117
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
"Bicycle accelerations are so slow that most roadies are wasting their money to reduce rotating mass by ten grams. It's positively absurd to think that a touring cyclist would want to be at all concerned by rotating mass. It's simply not an issue."

What's absurd is to add 24-32 additional spokes and nipples if there isn't any need to. If one wants the additional strength, if that is what it actually is, that's fine. But there is additional rotating weight. If you don't notice it your bike may already be too heavy.

Here is a good sumary. good coverage of the advantages of many spokes along with the limitations of not being able to max out tension which is a good also.

http://draco.acs.uci.edu/rbfaq/FAQ/8c.8.html

Last edited by NoReg; 02-05-06 at 03:03 AM.
NoReg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-06, 09:46 AM   #19
ken cummings
Senior Member
 
ken cummings's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: northern California
Bikes: Bruce Gordon BLT, Cannondale parts bike, Ecodyne recumbent trike, Counterpoint Opus 2, miyata 1000
Posts: 5,601
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I use 36 front and rear on my touring bike. I also use it for commuting. Total weight of me, bike, and gear was 260 pounds. I took it single-tracking in a local state park on rocky trails several times and had no problem. That was maybe 100s not your 1000s but still on the way thru I would also pick up a nice 20-30 lb rock for my yard. Any secret would be the 700x38 tires. I have broken one spoke in two years, on the rear wheel, cluster side as expected. If you are going to treat your touring road bike like a mountain bike consider starting with MTB-equivalent tires. Or just tour on a MTB.
ken cummings is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:01 AM.