Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Touring
Reload this Page >

130mm or 135mm Hubs for Loaded Touring and What Spoke Count?

Notices
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.

130mm or 135mm Hubs for Loaded Touring and What Spoke Count?

Old 07-25-10, 03:58 PM
  #1  
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 130
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked 3 Times in 1 Post
130mm or 135mm Hubs for Loaded Touring and What Spoke Count?

I'm building a bike myself for loaded touring. I'm estimating a loaded weight of 370lbs (rider, bike, load) in ready-to-tour trim. For that weight, is the reduced rear-wheel dish of using a 135mm hub a significant advantage compared to a 130mm hub?

Also, with either of these spacing options, is a 36-spoke rear wheel going to be strong enough for the design weight (aka can I avoid trying to scrounge up a more expensive "touring" or tandem hub)?
williaty is offline  
Old 07-25-10, 04:32 PM
  #2  
Senior Member
 
skilsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Victoria, Canada
Posts: 1,541

Bikes: Cannondale t1, Koga-Miyata World Traveller

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
370 lbs sounds like a lot of weight for any bike to handle, except a tandem.
Have you thought of pulling a trailer? I was 250 lbs when I bought a touring bike with 36 spoke wheels. I already had panniers, but chose to buy a second hand burley trailer. I've had a couple weekend excursions with it and think it is great.
I can't think of a more miserable job than replacing spokes on the drive side of a rear wheel.
skilsaw is offline  
Old 07-25-10, 04:34 PM
  #3  
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 130
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked 3 Times in 1 Post
I'm 285lbs. I'm allotting 30lbs for the bike and 50lbs for stuff. Moving the 50lbs of stuff to a trailer doesn't make that much difference, really.
williaty is offline  
Old 07-25-10, 05:10 PM
  #4  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,200
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 137 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 81 Times in 64 Posts
I'd go for 135mm and 13g butted spokes on a heavy rim. I"m assuming you're seeking 700c rims and not 26" but you don't state what size of tire you're expecting to use which has some bearing on the width of rim.
LeeG is offline  
Old 07-25-10, 05:11 PM
  #5  
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 130
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked 3 Times in 1 Post
Yes, 700c rims, sorry. I'm planning on being able to run tire widths around 38, hopefully. In theory, the frame should clear them.
williaty is offline  
Old 07-25-10, 06:07 PM
  #6  
mev
bicycle tourist
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Austin, Texas, USA
Posts: 2,299

Bikes: Trek 520, Lightfoot Ranger, Trek 4500

Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 476 Post(s)
Liked 263 Times in 178 Posts
For what its worth, I've ridden with slightly less than that weight. On a 6089 mile trip across Canada in 1997, I broke three rims.

After that ride, I switched to using a 48-spoke rear wheel and hub. After sufficient number of miles, I'll still wear those out, but those 48-spoke wheels did well both on a ride around Australia (2001) and one across Russia (2007) as well as many shorter tours as well. I'm told that a well-built 36-spoke wheel should do at least as well, but the 48s have given me just a bit more margin.
mev is offline  
Old 07-25-10, 06:26 PM
  #7  
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,115
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 1 Post
On the original question, I don't think the rear wheel spread will make any difference in wheel durability. But the advantage, if slight is to 135. which is also standard width for modern components. In theory, wider rear hubs ought to mean stronger rigging angles for the spokes, but that isn't the only place they can allocate the wider spacing to, it can go to brake configurations, or cassettes. From the maker's perspective, they aren't making weaker hubs, they have a spoking package they believe in and may use the rest of the space for other things. These hubs were designed foir MTB use, maybe if they were trying to suit our market they would tweak them differently, as Phil does on it's touring hubs. Wider hubs also put a premium on stronger axle construction, though 135 is hardly pushing that.

I've cycled at the low end of the numbers you mention, and never had a wheel problem with 36 spokes, well built wheels, and stronger brands of rims. Hub width is not a factor in my calculations, and that includes increases to 145mm. Because I am at the upper end I have moved to 40 spoke 700c wheels.
NoReg is offline  
Old 07-25-10, 06:39 PM
  #8  
cyclopath
 
vik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Victoria, BC
Posts: 5,264

Bikes: Surly Krampus, Surly Straggler, Pivot Mach 6, Bike Friday Tikit, Bike Friday Tandem, Santa Cruz Nomad

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times in 6 Posts
If you move to an IGH you can get an undished wheel without braking the bank. Folks have been using Alfines in their cargo bikes and mtn bikes without issue and they are priced quite reasonably. You can pair with a double front chainring for a wide range setup.

32H dishless wheel is as strong as a 40H dished wheel.
__________________
safe riding - Vik
VikApproved

Last edited by vik; 07-25-10 at 07:11 PM.
vik is offline  
Old 07-25-10, 11:46 PM
  #9  
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,115
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 1 Post
With the Nexus you can get a 36 spoke hub, though the Afine is supposed to be better than the Nexus redline, though I don't know why. And they are 132 over the washer, bipassing the whole 130 vs 135 thing even further.
NoReg is offline  
Old 07-25-10, 11:50 PM
  #10  
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 130
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked 3 Times in 1 Post
AUSHTA. The 135mm spacing of the mountain hubs does allow for enough less dish to make the wheels meaningfully stronger.

The only thing left to decide now is how many spokes to use for each wheel. Clyde forum has some surprisingly heavy people riding some surprisingly low spoke counts but that just kinda gives me the willies.
williaty is offline  
Old 07-26-10, 12:12 AM
  #11  
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,115
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 1 Post
Basic theory holds that well made wheels are not terribly bothered by fat people rolling smoothly around. Strong 250 pounders hammering on the stuff is another mater.

https://bike.shimano.com/publish/cont...ub%20Specs.pdf

Here are some dimensions for hubs. Between 130s, and 135s, you can get a whole .4 mm of difference in the spread, as in 21.7 mm vs 22.1 mm. Some 135 are wider still, it depends on the exact hub. The 135s I actually use come out at 22.1, which doesn't get me all worked up, to be honest. Some of the slack side measures are more noteworthy, but then that side is not the side that gives trouble or is difficult to fix, in some respects more spoke tension on the slack side wouldn't be all bad - a wheelbuilders dodge to improve trueness of the wheels.
NoReg is offline  
Old 07-26-10, 06:36 AM
  #12  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,200
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 137 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 81 Times in 64 Posts
Mev, what kind of rims did you have and how did they break?
LeeG is offline  
Old 07-26-10, 07:45 AM
  #13  
Mad bike riding scientist
 
cyccommute's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 27,362

Bikes: Some silver ones, a red one, a black and orange one, and a few titanium ones

Mentioned: 152 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6218 Post(s)
Liked 4,217 Times in 2,364 Posts
Originally Posted by williaty
I'm building a bike myself for loaded touring. I'm estimating a loaded weight of 370lbs (rider, bike, load) in ready-to-tour trim. For that weight, is the reduced rear-wheel dish of using a 135mm hub a significant advantage compared to a 130mm hub?

Also, with either of these spacing options, is a 36-spoke rear wheel going to be strong enough for the design weight (aka can I avoid trying to scrounge up a more expensive "touring" or tandem hub)?
I'd suggest DT Alpine III spokes on at least a 36 spoke rear wheel. 40 would probably be better but are harder to find. I'd go with a 135mm hub just because of the slightly wider hub shell. Also look into off-center drilled rims for the rear. This reduces the dish further and strengthens the wheel. Something like a Velocity Aerohead OC or a Velocity Synergy OC would do the trick. Both should work with the tires you want to use.
__________________
Stuart Black
Plan Epsilon Around Lake Michigan in the era of Covid
Old School…When It Wasn’t Ancient bikepacking
Gold Fever Three days of dirt in Colorado
Pokin' around the Poconos A cold ride around Lake Erie
Dinosaurs in Colorado A mountain bike guide to the Purgatory Canyon dinosaur trackway
Solo Without Pie. The search for pie in the Midwest.
Picking the Scablands. Washington and Oregon, 2005. Pie and spiders on the Columbia River!



cyccommute is offline  
Old 07-26-10, 08:09 AM
  #14  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,200
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 137 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 81 Times in 64 Posts
I wonder if the Synergy is really strong enough at 490 grams for 285lb rider. I'd go straight to a 625 gram Alex Adventurer , Mavic A319, Velocity Cliffhanger, Psycho or similar heavy duty rim where the bead flange is thick and more resistant to denting when the tire bottoms out.

Last edited by LeeG; 07-26-10 at 08:14 AM.
LeeG is offline  
Old 07-26-10, 11:54 AM
  #15  
Mad bike riding scientist
 
cyccommute's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 27,362

Bikes: Some silver ones, a red one, a black and orange one, and a few titanium ones

Mentioned: 152 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6218 Post(s)
Liked 4,217 Times in 2,364 Posts
Originally Posted by LeeG
I wonder if the Synergy is really strong enough at 490 grams for 285lb rider. I'd go straight to a 625 gram Alex Adventurer , Mavic A319, Velocity Cliffhanger, Psycho or similar heavy duty rim where the bead flange is thick and more resistant to denting when the tire bottoms out.
I don't really think that it would matter that much. The Velocity cliffhanger and the Psycho are mountain bike rims so they won't work in this application. The weights I see for the Alex is 520g which is on par with the A319 and only slightly different from the Synergy

The way to keep from denting the rim when the tire bottoms out is to put enough pressure in the tire so that it doesn't bottom out
__________________
Stuart Black
Plan Epsilon Around Lake Michigan in the era of Covid
Old School…When It Wasn’t Ancient bikepacking
Gold Fever Three days of dirt in Colorado
Pokin' around the Poconos A cold ride around Lake Erie
Dinosaurs in Colorado A mountain bike guide to the Purgatory Canyon dinosaur trackway
Solo Without Pie. The search for pie in the Midwest.
Picking the Scablands. Washington and Oregon, 2005. Pie and spiders on the Columbia River!




Last edited by cyccommute; 07-26-10 at 11:57 AM.
cyccommute is offline  
Old 07-26-10, 12:50 PM
  #16  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,200
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 137 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 81 Times in 64 Posts
Originally Posted by cyccommute
I don't really think that it would matter that much. The Velocity cliffhanger and the Psycho are mountain bike rims so they won't work in this application. The weights I see for the Alex is 520g which is on par with the A319 and only slightly different from the Synergy

The way to keep from denting the rim when the tire bottoms out is to put enough pressure in the tire so that it doesn't bottom out
I wonder how available those heavy Velocity rims are in 700c but the point is that the Synergy is not a heavy duty rim and question whether it's well matched to the forces that require 13g spokes. I agree completely that appropriate pressure keeps tires from bottoming out but in extreme circumstances and inattentive operator tires do bottom out and thinner flanges will bend before thicker flanges. I'm guessing but don't know for sure that the Synergy has thinner flanges as well as thinner rim walls than rims like the Adventurer or Cliffhanger. My old Dyad mtn bike rim was very strong when it got a pinch flat the rim was still true but the flange was bent in and needed to be pried back out a bit. Compared to old rims from 30yrs ago the whole rim would have got a flat spot. I'm thinking that a heavy person carrying a heavy load could benefit for the same margin of error in the rim flange as in the entire rim.

Cliffhanger in 26" and 700C
https://www.velocitywheels.com/store/...?pID=55&cID=22
SIZE: 26" WEIGHT: 580grams

https://www.velocitywheels.com/store/...?pID=22&cID=18
SIZE: 700c WEIGHT: 648grams

Synergy OC in 700C
https://www.velocitywheels.com/store/...?pID=32&cID=18
SIZE: 700C WEIGHT: 490grams

Dyad in 700C
https://www.velocitywheels.com/store/...?pID=24&cID=18
SIZE: 700c WEIGHT: 480grams

Psycho
https://www.velocitywheels.com/store/...pID=248&cID=18
SIZE: 700c WEIGHT: 904grams


https://www.alexrims.com/
ADVENTURER
W/CSW 700C-620g

https://www.mavic.com/road/products/a-319.324124.2.aspx
weight
Ř 700: 597 grams

https://www.mavic.com/road/products/a-719.324119.2.aspx

weight
Ř 700: 567 grams

https://www.rigida.com/en/products/hy...ms-5/sputnik-4
745 g = 622x19 (700c)

Last edited by LeeG; 07-26-10 at 04:32 PM.
LeeG is offline  
Old 07-26-10, 01:38 PM
  #17  
Mad bike riding scientist
 
cyccommute's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 27,362

Bikes: Some silver ones, a red one, a black and orange one, and a few titanium ones

Mentioned: 152 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6218 Post(s)
Liked 4,217 Times in 2,364 Posts
Originally Posted by LeeG
I wonder how available those heavy Velocity rims are in 700c but the point is that the Synergy is not a heavy duty rim and question whether it's well matched to the forces that require 13g spokes. I agree completely that appropriate pressure keeps tires from bottoming out but in extreme circumstances and inattentive operator tires do bottom out and thinner flanges will bend before thicker flanges. I'm guessing but don't know for sure that the Synergy has thinner flanges as well as thinner rim walls than rims like the Adventurer or Cliffhanger. My old Dyad mtn bike rim was very strong when it got a pinch flat the rim was still true but the flange was bent in and needed to be pried back out a bit. Compared to old rims from 30yrs ago the whole rim would have got a flat spot. I'm thinking that a heavy person carrying a heavy load could benefit for the same margin of error in the rim flange as in the entire rim.

Cliffhanger in 26" and 700C
https://www.velocitywheels.com/store/...?pID=55&cID=22
SIZE: 26" WEIGHT: 580grams

https://www.velocitywheels.com/store/...?pID=22&cID=18
SIZE: 700c WEIGHT: 648grams

Synergy OC in 700C
https://www.velocitywheels.com/store/...?pID=32&cID=18
SIZE: 700C WEIGHT: 490grams

Dyad in 700C
https://www.velocitywheels.com/store/...?pID=24&cID=18
SIZE: 700c WEIGHT: 480grams

Psycho
https://www.velocitywheels.com/store/...pID=248&cID=18
SIZE: 700c WEIGHT: 904grams


https://www.alexrims.com/
ADVENTURER
W/CSW 700C-620g

https://www.mavic.com/road/products/a-319.324124.2.aspx
weight
Ř 700: 597 grams

https://www.mavic.com/road/products/a-719.324119.2.aspx

weight
Ř 700: 567 grams
I doubt that you could get the Psycho and the Cliffhanger in the US since the Velocity page doesn't list them as being available here. I doubt, highly, that you'd want to run the Psycho on anything that you'd have to pedal uphill. That's nearly a kilogram for each wheel for just the rims and would be overkill even on a heavily loaded tandem.

The other weights I got were from vendors. Many list the Adventurer as 520g and the Mavic at around the same weight.
__________________
Stuart Black
Plan Epsilon Around Lake Michigan in the era of Covid
Old School…When It Wasn’t Ancient bikepacking
Gold Fever Three days of dirt in Colorado
Pokin' around the Poconos A cold ride around Lake Erie
Dinosaurs in Colorado A mountain bike guide to the Purgatory Canyon dinosaur trackway
Solo Without Pie. The search for pie in the Midwest.
Picking the Scablands. Washington and Oregon, 2005. Pie and spiders on the Columbia River!



cyccommute is offline  
Old 07-26-10, 02:02 PM
  #18  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,200
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 137 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 81 Times in 64 Posts
for one set of heart and lungs pushing 375 lbs up a hill it really won't matter much if the rear wheel weighs 2 or 3 lbs. Once you load up a bike with all that weight acceleration and light rims aren't a part of the conversation, having an intact wheel when flying down a hill at 35mph and hitting 1" ruts and rocks is. When that 38mm tire pumped to 85psi hits a big bump with all that weight it has a chance of bottoming out and I'm pretty sure a 490 gram rim won't hold up as well as a 600g.+rim. I'm just guessing but my gut sense is that in those instances where pinch flats can happen you're more likely to have to replace the light rim as opposed to just replacing the tube on a heavy rim.

It sure is inconsistent on rim weights, I'm guessing there's some variation within the rim models themselves. I wonder if Alex was playing fast and loose with their published rim weights when vendors first started using them. They list the 26" Adventurer as 545g but a vendor I've used lists it at 480g and the 700c as 620g and the vendor at 520!. That seems like a mighty big variation.

Some of my preference for a wider rim for heavy loads is resistance to tacoing. Lots of spokes can help there but if one is going for 36spokes why not make it a wide rim.
LeeG is offline  
Old 07-26-10, 04:27 PM
  #19  
mev
bicycle tourist
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Austin, Texas, USA
Posts: 2,299

Bikes: Trek 520, Lightfoot Ranger, Trek 4500

Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 476 Post(s)
Liked 263 Times in 178 Posts
Originally Posted by LeeG
Mev, what kind of rims did you have and how did they break?
Mixtures of Sun/Mavic rims. For the 48-spoke rims, two general types of failures:
1. Stress cracks developing from the eyelets. This was in northwest Australia near Broome:
https://www.mvermeulen.com/oneyear/Ph...llery3/374.htm
(looked more scary to me than this photo showed, so I was prudent to replace it).
2. The portion where brake pads rub pulls apart. This was in Ulan-Ude Russia south of Lake Baikal:
https://www.bikerussia.com/photos?pat...f=img_1124.jpg
(the rim in Russia had also developed some stress cracks around the eyelets but I rode several thousand kms on them without issues).

The failures I had with 36-spoke wheels were somewhat similar.
- Mavic rims had cracks around eyelets that led to spokes being pulled out. This was near mile 500 of Alaska Highway
- Cracks in the rims around eyelets, don't remember the rims, but near Kenora Ontario
- Similar issue again near Corner Brook, NF: https://www.mvermeulen.com/canada/fotox/jul16_06.jpg
mev is offline  
Old 07-26-10, 04:39 PM
  #20  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,200
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 137 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 81 Times in 64 Posts
Mev, any idea on the range of weights for those rims where the spoke holes broke through?
LeeG is offline  
Old 07-26-10, 04:42 PM
  #21  
mev
bicycle tourist
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Austin, Texas, USA
Posts: 2,299

Bikes: Trek 520, Lightfoot Ranger, Trek 4500

Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 476 Post(s)
Liked 263 Times in 178 Posts
Originally Posted by LeeG
Mev, any idea on the range of weights for those rims where the spoke holes broke through?
300-350 pounds for myself + bicycle + gear. Typically I'll start at higher end of that range at start of the trip and then also loose some weight off myself after many months on the road.
mev is offline  
Old 07-26-10, 05:02 PM
  #22  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,200
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 137 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 81 Times in 64 Posts
Originally Posted by mev
300-350 pounds for myself + bicycle + gear. Typically I'll start at higher end of that range at start of the trip and then also loose some weight off myself after many months on the road.
I'm sorry, I meant weight of the rims
LeeG is offline  
Old 07-26-10, 05:54 PM
  #23  
mev
bicycle tourist
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Austin, Texas, USA
Posts: 2,299

Bikes: Trek 520, Lightfoot Ranger, Trek 4500

Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 476 Post(s)
Liked 263 Times in 178 Posts
Originally Posted by LeeG
I'm sorry, I meant weight of the rims
, nope unfortunately not.
mev is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
zze86
Touring
52
07-24-18 09:45 PM
Steve_Boudreaux
Touring
9
01-31-14 03:40 PM
Slussman
Touring
35
04-07-13 08:16 AM
amicab99
Touring
25
09-17-11 12:14 AM
thcerblaretep
Touring
27
12-14-09 04:58 AM

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
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.