Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Road Cycling
Reload this Page >

Campagnolo G3 vs. Fulcrum 2:1

Notices
Road Cycling “It is by riding a bicycle that you learn the contours of a country best, since you have to sweat up the hills and coast down them. Thus you remember them as they actually are, while in a motor car only a high hill impresses you, and you have no such accurate remembrance of country you have driven through as you gain by riding a bicycle.” -- Ernest Hemingway

Campagnolo G3 vs. Fulcrum 2:1

Old 05-03-14, 08:33 AM
  #1  
HigherGround
Descends Like Avalanche
Thread Starter
 
HigherGround's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Somewhere between Funkytown and Margaritaville, PA
Posts: 5,769

Bikes: Lynskey R240, Sportive, and a Helix Sport disc model in the works; Eddy Merckx MX Leader; Specialized Rock Hopper Comp (1988!)

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Campagnolo G3 vs. Fulcrum 2:1

Does anyone have feedback about the durability or performance of rear wheels with the Campagnolo G3 lacing pattern vs. Fulcrum's 2:1 pattern? I am just in to the Clydesdale category, and some of the local roads can be fairly rough. I already did a Google search, but would appreciate any additional thoughts. Thanks!
__________________
The rider in my avatar is David Etxebarria, not me.
HigherGround is offline  
Old 05-03-14, 08:46 AM
  #2  
SkyDog75
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 3,794

Bikes: Bianchi San Mateo and a few others

Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 634 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 11 Times in 7 Posts
I'm not quite a clydesdale, but not a featherweight either. The roads here are horrible enough to damage my car's suspension repeatedly, but my Campagnolo Vento G3's from 2006 keep on rolling true. They've been great from a durability standpoint.
SkyDog75 is offline  
Old 05-03-14, 09:24 AM
  #3  
Campag4life
Voice of the Industry
 
Campag4life's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 12,572
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1187 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times in 8 Posts
A very good question and something I too have pondered having owned both styles of Campy/Fulcrum wheels. I guess philosophically, I prefer the more traditional 2:1 and why I prefer Fulcrum to some Campy wheels like Scirocco and Zonda which btw are both very good wheels at their price point. Honestly, I think either spoke pattern is effective. Given a choice, I just prefer the support of more equal spoke spacing of Fulcrum wheels.
Campag4life is offline  
Old 05-03-14, 09:33 AM
  #4  
gsa103
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 4,401

Bikes: Bianchi Infinito (Celeste, of course)

Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 754 Post(s)
Liked 103 Times in 76 Posts
I'd imagine the difference is minimal.

The G3 pattern basically is 3 spokes all at equal tension, originating at a single point. The G3 geometry will give a better balance of spoke tension, but you rely on the rim stiffness for the gaps between the spokes. Since the rims are semi-deep section, the rim is inherently fairly stiff. Basically, you have a rim suspended by a set of triangles. It will be very stiff at the triangle and more flexible away from them. Its also much easier to reinforce the rim at the spoke point.

The 2:1 pattern probably results in a bit more variability in the tension, but you'll have a more uniform stiffness across the wheel. This design is likely better as the rim gets lighter and shallower, but for a fairly stiff Al or CF wheel I could see the G3 design being better.
gsa103 is offline  
Old 05-03-14, 10:20 AM
  #5  
Campag4life
Voice of the Industry
 
Campag4life's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 12,572
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1187 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times in 8 Posts
Originally Posted by gsa103 View Post
I'd imagine the difference is minimal.

The G3 pattern basically is 3 spokes all at equal tension, originating at a single point. The G3 geometry will give a better balance of spoke tension, but you rely on the rim stiffness for the gaps between the spokes. Since the rims are semi-deep section, the rim is inherently fairly stiff. Basically, you have a rim suspended by a set of triangles. It will be very stiff at the triangle and more flexible away from them. Its also much easier to reinforce the rim at the spoke point.

The 2:1 pattern probably results in a bit more variability in the tension, but you'll have a more uniform stiffness across the wheel. This design is likely better as the rim gets lighter and shallower, but for a fairly stiff Al or CF wheel I could see the G3 design being better.
Pretty well stated. Not sure if rim stiffness for example is actually elevated to meet the more point loaded G3 pattern...in the case of comparing Campy versus Fulcrum...because this difference would be detected by weight for a given rim selection and both wheelsets...Campy versus Fulcrum weigh about the same for their respective price points...most notable difference between say Zonda and Fulcrum 3 being expressly spoke pattern versus weight.
Campag4life is offline  
Old 05-03-14, 10:36 AM
  #6  
rpenmanparker 
Senior Member
 
rpenmanparker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682

Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build

Mentioned: 106 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6556 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 56 Times in 35 Posts
They are both 2:1 patterns. I don't see why one 2:1 pattern would give more balanced tension than the other. In both cases the NDS with half the spokes of the DS will require twice the tension it would have if the spoke number were balanced side to side. That should bring the NDS tension up close to the DS tension.
__________________
Robert

Originally Posted by LAJ View Post
No matter where I go, here I am...
rpenmanparker is offline  
Old 05-03-14, 03:08 PM
  #7  
clausen
Senior Member
 
clausen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Northern Ontario
Posts: 3,659

Bikes: Colnago Master XL, Bianchi Via Nirone 7, Marinoni Fango

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I have '05 Ventos that are still perfectly straight, I also have a pair of Khamsins on my cross bike and there fine as well. My Zondas on my other road bike are also fine.
clausen is offline  
Old 05-03-14, 08:30 PM
  #8  
macca33
Senior Member
 
macca33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: West Gippy, Australia
Posts: 607

Bikes: 2017 Ridley Noah SL - Candy Apple DA9000, 2011 CAAD10 Berzerker Ult6800, 2013 FOCUS Mares CX Ult6800

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by rpenmanparker View Post
They are both 2:1 patterns. I don't see why one 2:1 pattern would give more balanced tension than the other. In both cases the NDS with half the spokes of the DS will require twice the tension it would have if the spoke number were balanced side to side. That should bring the NDS tension up close to the DS tension.

This was my belief also - both have the same spoke pattern basic, ie 2:1.

OP - I have Fulcrum R1 (x2), R3 and R5 wheelsets and am in the large category - they are all quite capable of lugging my big-ness around the crappy roads I endure over here. Fulrcum / Campag state a 109Kg rider weight limit, so if you are under that and treat your gear with a small modicum of respect, you should be fine with those wheelsets - your next choice will be whether you want Campag or Fulcrum branded wheels and how much you wish to spend.

cheers
macca33 is offline  
Old 05-03-14, 08:40 PM
  #9  
equinoxranch
Junior Member
 
equinoxranch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 17
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
You are aware that Campy own Fulcrum, right?


On balance (no pun intended), the difference between either is minimal at best, if that. Both brands are beyond exceptional.

I am still partial to say Campy hubs built up in a 32x3X/14-15 brass nipple front, 32x3X/14-15 left side, 14 drive side rear, again brass nipples on as wide a tubular rim as possible. Sure wish Mavic still made their SSC's and/or that Ambrosio had not gone out of business.
equinoxranch is offline  
Old 05-05-14, 08:14 AM
  #10  
gfk_velo
Full Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 373

Bikes: Too many!

Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 95 Post(s)
Liked 69 Times in 38 Posts
Originally Posted by Campag4life View Post
Pretty well stated. Not sure if rim stiffness for example is actually elevated to meet the more point loaded G3 pattern...in the case of comparing Campy versus Fulcrum...because this difference would be detected by weight for a given rim selection and both wheelsets...Campy versus Fulcrum weigh about the same for their respective price points...most notable difference between say Zonda and Fulcrum 3 being expressly spoke pattern versus weight.
It's not quite true to say that the three spokes in each group are all at the same tension, gsa103 - what it is tue to say, though, is that the two drive side spokes should be at the same tension (in effect they act as one spoke) and that all the groups should be at the same nett tension. NGS tension is lower than GS tension, though on the newer asymmetric rim designs, they are very close to one another.

It's a fallacy to say that the rim needs to be significantly stiffer between the spoke groups in G3 than in other designs - in fact it's almost the reverse. In common with Rolf and Bontrager (which use Rolf Dietrich's patent) wheels, part of the object of G3 is to allow higher spoke tensions without the rim adopting a slight "S" profile which were the rim insufficiently stiff, tends to happen with equally spaced spokes. The shorter gap between the spoke grooups does not allow this distortion to occur.

What Campagnolo also do in the G3 rim, which differentiates from the Fulcrum rim, is a step after the rim is drilled, machined, anodised and checked for axial planarity and roundness: The areas between the spoke groups are depressed radially. This means that when the correct tension is present in the spoke groups, the wheel will be "sprung" radially true. In effect this springing counterbalances the tensions in the spokes and makes for a more torsionally stable wheel.

Spoke load paths through the wheel are also different in G3 to 2:1. To check this, if you have an accurate spoke tensioneter, sit a colleague on a bike with a standard wheel and measure the tension in each spoke, then do likewise for a G3 and a 2:1. You will note that the way that the weight of the rider is distributed through the spokes is different and stays more equal in a G3 wheel than a standard one. 2:1 is more equal than a "normal" wheel.

All technical considerations aside, the G3 and the 2:1 patterns both make for very durable wheels. We rarely have to rebuild or repair either at the SC, unless as a result of crash damage or rim damage from the edge of a pothole, etc.
gfk_velo is offline  
Old 05-05-14, 09:40 PM
  #11  
HigherGround
Descends Like Avalanche
Thread Starter
 
HigherGround's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Somewhere between Funkytown and Margaritaville, PA
Posts: 5,769

Bikes: Lynskey R240, Sportive, and a Helix Sport disc model in the works; Eddy Merckx MX Leader; Specialized Rock Hopper Comp (1988!)

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by equinoxranch View Post
You are aware that Campy own Fulcrum, right?
Yep. Basically it is an opportunity for them to expand their wheel market to Shimano or Sram equipped riders, without them needing to be putting Campagnolo-labeled wheels on their bikes.

Thank you to everyone who contributed responses to this thread!
__________________
The rider in my avatar is David Etxebarria, not me.
HigherGround is offline  
Old 05-06-14, 04:58 AM
  #12  
Campag4life
Voice of the Industry
 
Campag4life's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 12,572
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1187 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times in 8 Posts
Originally Posted by gfk_velo View Post
It's not quite true to say that the three spokes in each group are all at the same tension, gsa103 - what it is tue to say, though, is that the two drive side spokes should be at the same tension (in effect they act as one spoke) and that all the groups should be at the same nett tension. NGS tension is lower than GS tension, though on the newer asymmetric rim designs, they are very close to one another.

It's a fallacy to say that the rim needs to be significantly stiffer between the spoke groups in G3 than in other designs - in fact it's almost the reverse. In common with Rolf and Bontrager (which use Rolf Dietrich's patent) wheels, part of the object of G3 is to allow higher spoke tensions without the rim adopting a slight "S" profile which were the rim insufficiently stiff, tends to happen with equally spaced spokes. The shorter gap between the spoke grooups does not allow this distortion to occur.

What Campagnolo also do in the G3 rim, which differentiates from the Fulcrum rim, is a step after the rim is drilled, machined, anodised and checked for axial planarity and roundness: The areas between the spoke groups are depressed radially. This means that when the correct tension is present in the spoke groups, the wheel will be "sprung" radially true. In effect this springing counterbalances the tensions in the spokes and makes for a more torsionally stable wheel.

Spoke load paths through the wheel are also different in G3 to 2:1. To check this, if you have an accurate spoke tensioneter, sit a colleague on a bike with a standard wheel and measure the tension in each spoke, then do likewise for a G3 and a 2:1. You will note that the way that the weight of the rider is distributed through the spokes is different and stays more equal in a G3 wheel than a standard one. 2:1 is more equal than a "normal" wheel.

All technical considerations aside, the G3 and the 2:1 patterns both make for very durable wheels. We rarely have to rebuild or repair either at the SC, unless as a result of crash damage or rim damage from the edge of a pothole, etc.
Nicely stated. All said, do you have a personal preference be it G3 versus 2:1 based upon the differences you note above?

PS: Perhaps Campagnolo has placed their vote implicitly by using the G3 spoke pattern on their namesake wheels and opting for 2:1 on their sister company.

Thanks
Campag4life is offline  
Old 05-06-14, 05:03 AM
  #13  
Campag4life
Voice of the Industry
 
Campag4life's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 12,572
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1187 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times in 8 Posts
Originally Posted by HigherGround View Post
Yep. Basically it is an opportunity for them to expand their wheel market to Shimano or Sram equipped riders, without them needing to be putting Campagnolo-labeled wheels on their bikes.

Thank you to everyone who contributed responses to this thread!
A good point as to why Fulcrum exists...including their crank line up.
Campag4life is offline  
Old 05-06-14, 05:20 PM
  #14  
gfk_velo
Full Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 373

Bikes: Too many!

Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 95 Post(s)
Liked 69 Times in 38 Posts
Originally Posted by Campag4life View Post
Nicely stated. All said, do you have a personal preference be it G3 versus 2:1 based upon the differences you note above?

PS: Perhaps Campagnolo has placed their vote implicitly by using the G3 spoke pattern on their namesake wheels and opting for 2:1 on their sister company.

Thanks

Thanks for your kind words, Campag4life!

For me, I think G3 has the edge but there is very little in it :-)
That might just be me with my Campagnolo SC hat on ...

BTW Equinoxranch, I think the Ambrosio rims you are referring to are the Nemesis Day / Reine du Nord? They are still available, Ambrosio are alive and kicking :-) - I built a pair (albeit conventionally spoked 32/32 x3 just two weeks ago for a guy doing the Hot Chillee Dunkerque-Roubaix Sportif.
gfk_velo is offline  
Old 08-28-16, 02:49 PM
  #15  
xifias
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 71
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Im about to buy a pair of shamals ultra mega etc..Currently i own a pair of Fulcrum Racing 5 (2014 model) and a pair of Campy Ventos G3 (2011 model) no assymetric rim.I weigh around 88 kilos.Between the two fulcrums feel way more responsive easier to pedal and reactive whereas Ventos feel sluggish slow to react and i feel tired as if i waste energy on them on climbs.
Does this happen due to the j bend spokes the ventos have,or the G3 pattern is a gimmick and eye candy?Cause as a matter of sense fulcrum wheels have evenly spaced spokes around the rim.
I dont want to spend so much money on shamals to learn the hard way that zeros would be better.
I do read many reviews that shamals and the G3 are excelent etc but so say for the 2011 ventos too,but for me they are just pure crap compared to racing 5's
xifias is offline  
Old 08-28-16, 05:22 PM
  #16  
Sy Reene
Advocatus Diaboli
 
Sy Reene's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Wherever I am
Posts: 7,958

Bikes: Merlin Cyrene, Nashbar steel CX

Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4278 Post(s)
Liked 1,243 Times in 818 Posts
Currently riding and enjoying Eurus G3 wheelset. Am 185lb so not technically a Clyde. No issue fwiw to date. Seem extremely solid, if a bit stiff.
Sy Reene is offline  
Old 08-29-16, 03:23 AM
  #17  
xifias
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 71
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sy Reene View Post
Currently riding and enjoying Eurus G3 wheelset. Am 185lb so not technically a Clyde. No issue fwiw to date. Seem extremely solid, if a bit stiff.
have you or someone else ridden both shamal/eurus and racing zero to place an opinion?
As i get it the lacing of the latter is better?
xifias is offline  
Old 08-29-16, 02:10 PM
  #18  
garciawork
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Meridian, ID
Posts: 1,353

Bikes: Mikkelsen custom steel, Santa Cruz Chameleon SS, old trek trainer bike

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
I can only state my experience with two sets of fulcrum racing 3 two way's (one set sold with a bike). Never had ONE problem. Still as true as the day I bought them with thousands of miles. I would prefer campy wheels to match, but they cost more most of the time, so I went fulcrum.
garciawork is offline  
Old 08-30-16, 10:39 AM
  #19  
tomato coupe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,577

Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2261 Post(s)
Liked 3,913 Times in 1,583 Posts
Originally Posted by HigherGround View Post
Does anyone have feedback about the durability or performance of rear wheels with the Campagnolo G3 lacing pattern vs. Fulcrum's 2:1 pattern? I am just in to the Clydesdale category, and some of the local roads can be fairly rough. I already did a Google search, but would appreciate any additional thoughts. Thanks!
I presently have two sets of Fulcrum wheels and two sets of Campy wheels, and have never had a problem with any of them. I weigh about 180 lbs.
tomato coupe is offline  
Old 08-30-16, 01:13 PM
  #20  
xifias
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 71
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by tomato coupe View Post
I presently have two sets of Fulcrum wheels and two sets of Campy wheels, and have never had a problem with any of them. I weigh about 180 lbs.
Do they differ in reactiveness?is G3 lacing flexing more than fulcrums?which models?
xifias is offline  
Old 08-30-16, 06:53 PM
  #21  
tomato coupe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,577

Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2261 Post(s)
Liked 3,913 Times in 1,583 Posts
Originally Posted by xifias View Post
Do they differ in reactiveness?
I don't know what that means.

is G3 lacing flexing more than fulcrums?
I don't notice any difference.

which models?
Scirocco, Zonda, Racing 3, Racing 3 two-way.
tomato coupe is offline  
Old 08-31-16, 02:32 AM
  #22  
xifias
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 71
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by tomato coupe View Post
I don't know what that means.
Its how quick responds to the external parameters as a change of pace,or a very hard sprint,or climbing out of the saddle,or response to steering commands for the front wheel.
Cause as i mentioned above an earlier pair of G3 ventos i own is really really sluggish compared to racing 5.Yet its a bit heavier.
xifias is offline  
Old 09-05-16, 03:44 AM
  #23  
gfk_velo
Full Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 373

Bikes: Too many!

Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 95 Post(s)
Liked 69 Times in 38 Posts
Originally Posted by xifias View Post
Im about to buy a pair of shamals ultra mega etc..Currently i own a pair of Fulcrum Racing 5 (2014 model) and a pair of Campy Ventos G3 (2011 model) no assymetric rim.I weigh around 88 kilos.Between the two fulcrums feel way more responsive easier to pedal and reactive whereas Ventos feel sluggish slow to react and i feel tired as if i waste energy on them on climbs.
Does this happen due to the j bend spokes the ventos have,or the G3 pattern is a gimmick and eye candy?Cause as a matter of sense fulcrum wheels have evenly spaced spokes around the rim.
I dont want to spend so much money on shamals to learn the hard way that zeros would be better.
I do read many reviews that shamals and the G3 are excelent etc but so say for the 2011 ventos too,but for me they are just pure crap compared to racing 5's

You really need to compare like with like if you want to assess the difference in spoking patterns on two current wheels (which are somewhat different to your reference wheels in any case) and you're not doing so here ...

Probably the differences that you are feeling is partly generated by the difference in drive-side hub flange size. the 2011 Vento did not have the Mega flange, the R5s, being a more recent design, do. Larger flange = better torque transfer. Also the hub shell (aside from the flanges) is different and as a result the R5s may transfer toque a bit better. The Assymetric rim evens out spoke tensions to some extent in the R5s so that contributes to greater torsional stiffness ... the G3 pattern does the same thing by a different route but the older Vento Reaction design has a shallower rim with smaller cross-section so it may not be as effective as the rim platform is less rigid.

I think you'd have to ride current alloy R0s and Shamals back-to-back to get a real comparison but we work on both regularly and find them equally technically reliable. I've ridden both but own all Shamals.
gfk_velo is offline  
Old 09-05-16, 05:42 AM
  #24  
xifias
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 71
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by gfk_velo View Post

I think you'd have to ride current alloy R0s and Shamals back-to-back to get a real comparison but we work on both regularly and find them equally technically reliable. I've ridden both but own all Shamals.

Sure that would be the best test.From your experience which of the two (shamals-R0s) ride "better" in some extent?
R0s have alloy rear hub (instead of carbon on shamals) which i think it may be better from integrity's perspective,instead of a glued together plastic+metal alloy.

Apart from hubs,spoke tension on Vento's drive side are like 1/3 of the tension R5s have.Non drive side is less too.I tried to crank up the tensions in order to improve them but the rim becomes a "polugon" if you know what i mean,with high and low spots where it has groups of spokes and where it hasnt.
xifias is offline  
Old 09-06-16, 04:44 AM
  #25  
gfk_velo
Full Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 373

Bikes: Too many!

Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 95 Post(s)
Liked 69 Times in 38 Posts
Originally Posted by xifias View Post
Sure that would be the best test.From your experience which of the two (shamals-R0s) ride "better" in some extent?
R0s have alloy rear hub (instead of carbon on shamals) which i think it may be better from integrity's perspective,instead of a glued together plastic+metal alloy.
Don't try to over-think this. The bonded hubs are used on all Campagnolo's top-end wheels, Bora 35s, Bora Ultras, Shamals and the older models like Hyperon Ultra, Neutron Ultra etc - separation practically never happens and I certainly never heard Greipel or Valverde complain about the stiffness of the wheels when sprinting or climbing (and I do work with the teams).

Apart from hubs,spoke tension on Vento's drive side are like 1/3 of the tension R5s have.Non drive side is less too.I tried to crank up the tensions in order to improve them but the rim becomes a "polugon" if you know what i mean,with high and low spots where it has groups of spokes and where it hasnt.
It won't be a third, that much is for sure. I don't know how much knowledge of wheelbuilding you have but typical values for the older Ventos are around 120 kgf on the drive side and 90 kgf on the non-drive side. The more recent R5s are build at around the same, maybe 10 kgs higher with a tolerance of +/- 10 kfg on the drive side in both cases, with whatever variation that produces in the non-drive side when the wheel has correct offset / dish.

If a wheel like the Vento only had a gear side tension of 40kgf, it would simply collapse in use, because it would be incapable of supporting the combined weight of the rider and the bike,or resisting the torsional load of pedalling. This would be true of virtually any wheel, let alone one with a low spoke count.

As a very general rule, the lower the spoke count, the higher the tension required in each spoke in order to support the loads on the wheel. In a correctly built wheel, the spokes at lowest tension at any given time in the rotation of the wheel, when the wheel is in use, must still retain enough tension to actually be in significant tension ... so say the spoke starts at a static tension of 90 kgs, if the fact that the wheel is being rotated by forces on the hub and being effectively deformed by the weight of the rider and bike acting through the hub reduces tension by 40 kgs (as an example) then the spoke retains a tesnion of 50kgs, which is fine. The lower that retained tension figure goes, towards zero, the less integrity the wheel will have, and in the case of a wheel with j-bend sookes, the less longevity the spokes will be liable to have. This is the reason that a conventional rear wheel will tend to break spokes on the looser, non-gear side rather than the gear side.

The correct net gearside / non-gearside tension is reached in a G3 wheel, when it is being built, when the wheel is round. The rims are actually made polygonal to start with, so that when the spoke tension is introduced, the areas that are now "low spots" in your wheel are actually "high spots" before the wheel is built / tensioned. Hence it's no surprise that your wheel has now gone "the other way". Unfortunately, once that has happened, there is no way to correct it which is why we don't recommend that wheelbuilders who are not familiat with G3 wheels work on them.

I don't find any great difference between G3 and Fulcrum-style 2:1 lacing, my gut feeling from three decades of building wheels for everyone from World Champions to club riders is that because of the different way loads pass through a G3 wheel, they are probably a better proposition for heavier riders but Fulcrum and Campagnolo give the same rider weight advice for both designs. My colleagues at the factory tell me that FEA produces no significant differences, so maybe my gut feeling is wrong - that's the danger of basing judgement on perception - sometimes it is warped!

I think the problem, as I mentioned, is that you are not making a direct like-with-like comparison. you have identified a difference and assumed that the difference arises from the spoking pattern when in fact there are several other variables at work.

Last edited by gfk_velo; 09-06-16 at 06:28 AM. Reason: explanation, spelling
gfk_velo is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.