Originally Posted by
Road Fan
I think it doesn't matter any more. I calculated the spoke lengths for the Ukai rim and 3x, and the original spokes are about a mm short of the calculated value2. I just finished lacing and turning out the slack by hand, and the fittings look good. I'm using Roger Musson's Ebook as a basic source of procedure. The original spokes and the original nipples are all usable, according to him. If you want to argue, get the book and do your research; I will not teach it, nor is it useful to tell me "I just would not trust it." My answer is, I have reason to think you are wrong. But I still have to do a rim swap-over on the front wheel, another Ukai rim to replace the front French steel rim. I might still need some new spokes if something goes wrong or I blow it. So I might spring for a set of new 15/17/15 spokes for my Rudge roadie, so ... maybe those Robergels look good. She's also being given some vintage alloy clinchers.
In these several discussions I've had numerous classic forum members, here and on CR, professionals and amateurs, enthusiasts of old paint and those trying to hold on to their former racing form (I never had racing form), argue with my desire for nipples that fit and ask why don't I just buy new complete spokes, argue with my interest in saving some $$ by reusing old spokes which are butted and a pretty fine gauge, and just buy new because of "all the hassle, dood!" or "just tell your bud to buy a new bike, man!", and then refuse to respond with clear answers (or any) when I ask for what does he have and what's his price.
Btw, Roger Musson in his wheelbuilding book is very positive on re-using spokes. Skeptics should look into it. I'm not going to teach it.
For those who do not remember, this is not my bicycle and I do not have the luxury of junking it. I have asked the owner, along with the original people challenged to lead the manufacturing and teach them quality (frames were built in a brand-new bike factory in Ireland), but they were based in their homes in New England, and could not make them do things correctly. I and one of them recommended in the strongest terms not to depend on these bikes because there are many risks which cannot be guaranteed. Samuel Clemens said one will love a bicycle, if you survive. So, I did tell him to abandon this project because I am not sure it will be safe, but my concerns are with the frame, not the wheels. He refused, so I am just trying to make a pile of parts into a bike that may be ridden with care. I'm going to have to test it and shake it down, and test him and make sure he is capable of safe riding. But the fact that I know it is flawed does not excuse me if I add to the risk by poor assembly workmanship. I know he will not accept a box of parts, and I know that once I give him the assembled bike he will not resist the impulse to ride it. So I have to rectify everything I can or I would be at fault. I am assembling a machine that if it was mine, I would trust it. My concerns are with the frame.
Quick release lever/skewers are still an issue. I bought a pretty decent new set from a wheel company, and what was promised to be 126 mm is actually about 145. The company just said "sorry, dood, you should just get a new bike." After I finish with the setting the OLD and the chainline of the wheel, I'll trim the axle to its correct length, and then it will be a wheel which may be ridden.
Branko and some others, thank you for the appreciation constructive comments, and encouragement. Some others with comments to make regarding my psyche, status on "the spectrum," or criticism about attention to detail from those who do not impress me as being detailed problem solvers, your comments are not helpful, polite, desired, or welcomed by me in the BF public forum. Privately, you can call me whatever you want to. If any of you are actually psychiatrists that's different, but I think in that case it's highly unethical to say what has been said.
I don't intend to share my projects very openly on BF, in the future. This has not been fun, professional, or worth the aggravation and stress.
I reuse old spokes and nipples all the time. What was written was that the scrubbing had started, and the implication was the abrading was already through the plate. Fine for one's own bike, a problem for a "client" no matter if you are being paid or not.
This Irish Witcomb project has been beset by a lack of planning. The hubs, the cottered bottom brackets, the headset, crown race and bike finish, you are a smart guy, the lack of forethought is quite visible.
Thoughtful disassembly will catch stuff, with a top tier machine one can avoid being concerned as much, better probability things were correct at first, these were price point machines, monitoring prevents mayhem.
It does bring to mind that working on downmarket bikes is much more trouble that top line machines. The basic quality of components, the care of mfg and assembly are just not very good often.
There was a whole string regarding the headset fit and adjustment. These bikes were manufactured to be "good enough". Attempting to "blueprint" them out of sequence is fraught with the anguish as expressed.
My repeat on spoke lengths was that I have seen many wheels for example where the original mfg spokes were too short, think that it is easier to get a wheel done and on its way than grind back spokes when required, or keep track of differing lengths on a rear wheel. Just how it was, leave it to the mechanic years later to sweep up the mess. Most 5 speed rear wheels from mfg's back in the day use equal length spokes on both sides, sloppy practice, get the drive side correct and the non drive side will be short, the nipples will not be completely filled.
Most often a 1mm difference between the sides improves things much. 2mm on a 6 speed.