It seems like you are disagreeing - just to be able to disagree....

1. I never said the spokes don't take a straight path to the rim...I'm talking about spoke length calculation with a focus on offsets and the distance - and how it affects spokes and wheel builds...which is very little.

2. You talk about equalization...I'm using the word average...however inside and outside spokes are covering a different distance, a difference that varies with offset and flange diameter.

3. The calculator provides one spoke length per side when you provide one offset per side. However, the distance being covered by the spoke inside and outside is different. This is why oftentimes drive side spokes on a wheel with a very small drive side offset will arrive at the same point in a nipple, whereas non-drive spokes covering a large offset will vary every other spoke. The angle is so small on the drive side that whether interlaced or not - inside and outside spokes will arrive almost at the same point on average. However the angle on the non-drive will be such that the distance covered by inside and outside spokes becomes slightly more noticeable due to the observable inconsistent landing points of spokes ends in the nipples with a pattern of sorts.

This effect becomes most noticeable in rear multi-speed hubs with non-drive offsets in the high 30's and low 40's. (Maillard Helicomatic 126mm rears are a classic example...)

4. "The difference in spoke length would only become an issue for radial wheels." We are practically saying the same thing...why the "disagree"?

We are not looking at trees or a forest...we are looking at offsets, angles, triangles and distance. When two angles change (at hub and rim) - the distance changes. For practical everyday purposes though - when we measure to the center-of-flange - we are creating one triangle that represents the rough average of the other two triangles formed by outside and inside spokes. It keeps things simple, practical, and as I stated earlier, 99.99 percent of the time - it works.

I just don't like Shimano's and Campagnolo's bias to outside measurement cause it makes for a spoke length that's a tad longer than necessary - plus once again we get multiple parties measuring the same thing but with different references. I know Campagnolo is simply a reference to the outside of the flange thickness (1.6mm), but Shimano? I can't be sure, because no matter how hard I try I can't get a consistent number for the difference between on center and their number...

So I have to wait until the hub is in my hand...or someone else provides convincing numbers...as kirosska did.

All Shimano has to do is provide a graphic indicating where they aim for offsets and I'd be happy.

=8-)