Hi all, I'm working on my first ever wheel build. I am following the process in Brandt's book. I just finished lacing the wheels and I noticed one or two things that may or may not be a problem so I wante to get an opinion from the field before proceeding.
1) The spokes are laced in the 'opposite direction' compared to before. So where an outbound spoke used to go left, it now goes right. See attached picture, and notice the wear pattern from the previous spokes on the flange to see what I mean.
2) It appears that every spoke that was inserted as part of the "first group" extends further than the rest. By this I mean that even though the nipple is screwed on about the same amount, it doesn't come down as far through the rim. See the second attached picture, it doesn't look very significant but appears to be a consistent pattern. i.e. every 4th nipple isn't as far into the rim as the others. This issue worries me more than the first, but I can't find any errors in my procedure so I don;t know if everything should work out after tensioning

While I prefer to lace following the old pattern in the hub, it's mostly a cosmetic issue. There's some evidence that reversing the pattern increases the chance of flange failure, bit even so, it's not a material difference, so nothing to fret over. So no worries on the first question.

The Hi/lo pattern on the 2nd flange relates to a common newbie lacing error. To keep the following straight as I explain, let's call the valve noon on a clock, and the two spokes to it's right 1 & 2 respectively. Note whether these are left/right (to hub) or right/left, according to the zigzag in the rim. If they're left/right (1 goes to left flange), then that spoke stays to the left of the other all the way ending in a hole slightly to the left if sighting across the hub. Lay a pencil or spare spoke all the way across the hub at the respective holes and I'll bet that the left (#1) spoke is ending in a hole to the right of your pencil.

To solve this you'll have to unlace all the spokes in the second flange, and move them over one hole.

BTW- this sometimes means that you can't follow the old pattern in the hub because the prior rim might have been drilled right/left and this one left/right (or vice versa)

Cosmetics don;t really bother me at this point so it's good to know there's not a larger issue.


I actually don't think this is a problem. Using your nomenclature my #1 spoke goes to the NDS, #2 to the DS. The #1 spoke appears to stay to the left of the #2 spoke the whole way. The #1 flange hole is slightly to the left, or counterclockwise, of the #2 hole when sighting parallel to the axle. To be more clear, the #one hole is the nearest hole to the #2 hole on the opposite flange, in the counterclockwise (left) direction (due to the fact that the holes in the flanges are offset, of course). This is all assuming you're looking at the drive side, not the other way around.

I'm starting to think there's not a problem and I'm just seeing things...

Could it be as simple as the spokes in that first group, I didn't have to bend or anything to get into place? Maybe these just appear longer because they're generally straighter.

I don't know of any problem that can cause the Hi/lo effect you're describing except using spokes 5mm longer or a phase error where the spokes in the second flange are misplaced by one hole w/respect to those in the first. I hear you saying it's right, but the problem is telling me it's wrong.

If you haven't figured it out pose a photo of a section of the flange squarely end on so I can see both flanges with the lower one peeking out, so I can see the orientations of 4 a few spokes going to both flanges.

Yes. If the photo is taken with the spokes very slack it's possible that the only difference is straight vs. curved spokes. Tighten all the spokes until the end of the nipple lines up with the first (last?) thread on the spokes and you'll have a better sense of what you have. Hopefully this was a false alarm.

Yah, the spokes were very loose in the original photo. I tightened them so I can only see about 1 thread out the bottom of the nipple and things seem to have worked themselves out, things look about right and there's no obvious decrease in tension from one spoke to another. Regardless, I attached a couple photos which should clear up the lacing pattern. The yellow arrow is the location of the valve stem.

Thanks for your help!

Yep, false alarm, the pattern is right.

I noticed that the wheel is set up for disc brakes. Isn't there a reason for the original lacing pattern when using discs?

No.

There are some, including myself, that believe that the elbows out spokes are slightly more fatigue resistant, but the operative word here is slightly, and maybe should be very slightly. Most Americans build rear wheels with the pulling spokes elbows in, while most European and I build them elbows out.

The same operative logic would apply to a front disc wheel, but backward because it's the brake, not driving forces at issue.

But again, it's minor and doesn't warrant debate or obsessing over.

In the case of the rear, if it made a difference, would you build based on driving or stopping force considerations.

Back in the mid 90's when Bicycling was a decent magazine they had an article on this subject. At the time Mavic built 200 wheels for the European pro teams using all 4 possible patterns. They found that mirror image spokes with the pulling spokes elbow out stayed the truest and had the fewest broken spokes.

I'm aware of that, and was gratified to learn that I somehow chose to do it "right" back in 1967 or so. My theory at the time was that the elbows out spokes tended to touch and be supported by the flange rim, while the elbow in spoke were out in space angling away from the flange. It was then and remains only a loosely held theory, but for me enough to tip the scales slightly from a 50/50 proposition.

Until JB wrote his book, Americans tended to followed the European model, and many who were building before the book stayed that way. These days I can almost tell how long someone has been building wheels by which way they lace, ie. pre JB, post JB.

But, while I go the same way as Mavic, I don't think it makes a critical difference. IME well built wheels will fail from rim wear or fatigue before breaking spokes anyway, and that's if they aren't crashed, stolen or obsoleted first.

For what it is worth, I think most of which way to lace depends on tradition much more than anything.

I have talked with engineers at wheel manufacturers who have actually done a fair amount of testing to see which way works out to be the most durable and they could never tell a difference either way in some very controlled tests.

With that being said, I tend to lace pulling spokes with the elbows out as well because I have convinced myself the theory you described above makes more of a difference than the engineers told me but I have laced both ways in the past and never had a single issue regardless of elbows in or out.

We're on the same page. We prefer one direction as the landing on the edge advantage in what's basically a coin toss. It's like covering black and the zeros in Roulette.

Yep! At the very least it gives me more warm fuzzies with each wheel build! I always liked comparing it to pulling on a rope vs throwing the rope over your shoulder to pull but I won't lose sleep over lacing with elbows in to match the scars on a hub from a previous build.