Now that I've got my spoke sizes (266 mm and 268 mm). It's time to look at buying. I'm looking for stainless steel spokes (in silver) that are double butted with an elbow. The standard (according again to Musson's book) is 2 mm - 1.8 mm - 2 mm.
Web sites for searching on spokes are a mess. You've got to be careful about names, sizing, and whether it comes with nipples. For example, the DT Swiss Competition seems to be the standard double butted stainless steel spoke in their line - but it is available in several configurations, including straight pull, 2.0/1.8/2.0 and 2.0/1.5/2.0 - and of course in black or silver (looks like some other colors as well. To make matters worse some vendors use the SWG (standard wire gage) measure and call these 14/15/14. And that's not all, some vendors leave off the 3rd number, so when you see 2.0/1.8 (or 14/15) you cannot tell if the spoke is actually double butted or single butted without clicking on the item. Sometimes you see these written as 2.0/1.8 DB. I've found that virtually all the DT Swiss Competition spokes listed as 2.0/1.8 are actually the double butted (perhaps they don't make a single butted spoke).
I looked also Sapim spokes - their standard is the Sapim Race double butted (2.0/1.8/2.0). Their lightweight spoke is the Sapim Laser, which has a 1.5 mm center section. My thought is that the narrow center is probably too light for touring.
Pricing is all over the place - depending on packaging. Bought as singles, the DT Swiss spokes tend to be in the range of $1.00 to $1.30 (with nipples). Best deals are in boxes of 100 (or 72), which seem to get you down to about $0.75 per spoke. All the better deals seem to be without nipples. At their cheapest (a box of 100), brass nipples seem to run about $0.12 each - so you've got to factor that into the cheaper spokes.
Here's some of the deals
Outside Outfitters
- DT Swiss Competition Box of 100 with nipples at $0.82 each.
- Wheelsmith bag of 50 without nipples at $0.74 each + 0.12 per nipple = $0.84 each
Thor USA
- Sapim without nipples $0.50 each + 0.10 per nipple = 0.60 each
The Thor looks like the best deal - but shipping is $10, so for 80 spokes I'm adding another $0.125 per spoke to get a total of $0.725 including nipples (delivered). I've bought 40 of 266 mm and 40 of 268 mm along with 80 Sapim 12 mm silver nipples.
UPDATE (April 13,2016)
Working on the 2nd bike. ThorUSA is still the best deal.
Wednesday, December 23, 2015
Tuesday, December 22, 2015
Spoke size
Effective Rim Diameter
I created a measuring device for Effective Rim Diameter (ERD) following Roger Musson's book. The only thing I didn't do was glue/crimp one of the nipples onto one of the spokes. If you glue/crimp then your elastic bands must be able to fit through the holes in the rim. The bungee cord that I used was a bit thick, so I had to screw both nipples on/off for each measurement, which doubles the uncertainty associated with adjusting the nipple on only one end. I took 5 measurements on each rim.
Measurements for the first rim: 148 , 148, 149, 149, 149 mm; average = 148.6 mm
For the second rim: 148, 149, 149, 149, 148 mm; average = 148.6 mm.
Adding the 400 mm for the two spokes in the measuring device and we get an ERD of 548.6 mm, which is within my measurement precision of the official ERD of 549 mm (see http://sun-ringle.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/SUN_website_rim_chart_2012.pdf )
Front hub dimensions
The web site for Shimano has the following data on the HB-M8000 front hub (http://bike.shimano.com/content/sac-bike/en/home/components11/mountain/deore-xt-m8000/hb-m8000.html)
I checked the measurement between opposite holes on the flange. The distance between opposite spoke holes on the brake side of the hub is 44 mm, whereas the similar measurement on the non-break side is 41 mm, so this appears to be what they are calling the "Center to Flange" distances (which seems odd to me). Measuring the hub using the nomenclature on Musson, pg 56 - with the brake side being A and the gear side B.
Going to the spoke calculator at http://www.wheelpro.co.uk/spokecalc/ , and here's the result
So for a 3-cross (which is my plan), I need 16 spokes that are 266 mm and 16 spokes that are 268 mm (or 267 mm) for the front wheel.
Now for the rear wheel.
Rear hub dimensions
The web site for Shimano has the following data on the FH-M8000 rear hub
http://bike.shimano.com/content/sac-bike/en/home/mtb1/wheels---hubs/rear-hubs/fh-m8000.html
Again doing a 3 cross, I'll need 16 spokes of 267 mm (or 268 mm) and 16 spokes of 266 mm for the rear.
Buying plan:
I created a measuring device for Effective Rim Diameter (ERD) following Roger Musson's book. The only thing I didn't do was glue/crimp one of the nipples onto one of the spokes. If you glue/crimp then your elastic bands must be able to fit through the holes in the rim. The bungee cord that I used was a bit thick, so I had to screw both nipples on/off for each measurement, which doubles the uncertainty associated with adjusting the nipple on only one end. I took 5 measurements on each rim.
Measurements for the first rim: 148 , 148, 149, 149, 149 mm; average = 148.6 mm
For the second rim: 148, 149, 149, 149, 148 mm; average = 148.6 mm.
Adding the 400 mm for the two spokes in the measuring device and we get an ERD of 548.6 mm, which is within my measurement precision of the official ERD of 549 mm (see http://sun-ringle.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/SUN_website_rim_chart_2012.pdf )
Front hub dimensions
The web site for Shimano has the following data on the HB-M8000 front hub (http://bike.shimano.com/content/sac-bike/en/home/components11/mountain/deore-xt-m8000/hb-m8000.html)
- Axle length 100 mm
- Axle diameter 14 mm
- Center to Flange Right 41 mm
- Center to Flange Left 44 mm
I checked the measurement between opposite holes on the flange. The distance between opposite spoke holes on the brake side of the hub is 44 mm, whereas the similar measurement on the non-break side is 41 mm, so this appears to be what they are calling the "Center to Flange" distances (which seems odd to me). Measuring the hub using the nomenclature on Musson, pg 56 - with the brake side being A and the gear side B.
- A = 44 mm (left brake side)
- B = 41 mm
- F = 53.6 mm
- Z + Z = 99.6 so Z = 49.8
- X = 29 mm
- Y = 16.5 mm
- C = Z - X = 20.8 mm
- D = Z - Y = 33.3 mm
- A = 44 mm (left brake side)
- B = 41 mm
- X = 29.3 mm
- Y = 16.7 mm
- C = Z - X = 20.5 mm
- D = Z - Y = 33.1 mm
Going to the spoke calculator at http://www.wheelpro.co.uk/spokecalc/ , and here's the result
So for a 3-cross (which is my plan), I need 16 spokes that are 266 mm and 16 spokes that are 268 mm (or 267 mm) for the front wheel.
Now for the rear wheel.
Rear hub dimensions
The web site for Shimano has the following data on the FH-M8000 rear hub
http://bike.shimano.com/content/sac-bike/en/home/mtb1/wheels---hubs/rear-hubs/fh-m8000.html
- Axle length 146 mm
- Axle diameter 15 mm
- Center to Flange Right 45 mm
- Center to Flange Left 44 mm
Taking measurements - here my measuring gage couldn't reach then entire Z+Z length, so I've used a ruler for this measurement
- A = 44 mm (left brake side)
- B = 45 mm (right gear side)
- F = 50.0 mm
- Z + Z = 135 mm so Z = 67.5 mm
- X = 35.5 mm
- Y = 48.5 mm
- C = Z - X = 32 mm
- D = Z - Y = 19 mm
So we have C+D = 51, which is 1 mm to large from the F measurement. Splitting the difference on both X and Y provides
- A = 44 mm (left brake side)
- B = 45 mm (right gear side)
- F = 50.0 mm
- Z + Z = 135 mm so Z = 67.5 mm
- X = 36 mm
- Y = 49 mm
- C = Z - X = 31.5 mm
- D = Z - Y = 18.5 mm
which gives us C+D = 50 mm = F.
So back to the spoke computer:
Again doing a 3 cross, I'll need 16 spokes of 267 mm (or 268 mm) and 16 spokes of 266 mm for the rear.
Buying plan:
- 32 x 266 mm spokes
- 32 x 268 mm (or 267 mm) spokes
Let's make it an even 40 of each so that I have spares.
UPDATE (April 13, 2016):
I bought Sun RhynoLite rims, which are a little bit wider as I decided I wanted 1.75" tires on my touring bike, and will use the 1.5" tires on my spouse's. The online ERD for the RhynoLite is 549 mm, which checks against my measurements. I'm going with the same hubs, so everything is pretty much the same as above and I can use the same spokes as on the CR18 rims.
UPDATE (April 13, 2016):
I bought Sun RhynoLite rims, which are a little bit wider as I decided I wanted 1.75" tires on my touring bike, and will use the 1.5" tires on my spouse's. The online ERD for the RhynoLite is 549 mm, which checks against my measurements. I'm going with the same hubs, so everything is pretty much the same as above and I can use the same spokes as on the CR18 rims.
Monday, November 30, 2015
Rims
I've got the wheel hubs, but have been kind of dawdling about the rims. There really isn't a lot of info out there. The big question is "tubeless" or "clincher" - which has a simple answer for me - clincher - since its the easiest to repair when touring. Tubeless rims with self-sealing goop are probably less likely to flat, but seem to be more of a problem if you have to deal with a major breakdown. I'm sure there's someone who would argue the point - but I'm admitting complete ignorance up front, so you can consider that you've already won.
Some manufacturers claim their welded rims are better than pinned rims. Here I think I'll go with Roger Musson in The Professional Guide to Wheel Building: it makes no difference (you can buy a copy of the book at http://www.wheelpro.co.uk/wheelbuilding/book.php - it's definitely worth the $15 you've got to shell out). Musson argues that the strength of the wheel comes from the spokes pulling the rim inward, so that the entire rim is in compression and whether welded or pinned it will have the same basic performance. I would speculate that the failure modes under extreme stress might be slightly different - that is, they might break in a different way or at different points under extreme stress, but what the hell - the rim will be so deformed before breaking that it really shouldn't matter.
You can spend a boatload of cash on carbon rims, but that seems silly for a touring bike. I'm sticking with aluminum. At the upper end I was looking at Mavic EN 821 Disc rims, which are 21mm width, 32 hole and weigh in at 460 grams. PricePoint had them on sail for $60 (listing at $105). A similar price can be had on the Mavic XC 717 and EX 721. At the lower end, the Mavic XM 119 goes for only $25 ($38 MSRP). The EN 821 uses Mavic's FORE technology that claims stiffer and stronger http://www.mavic.us/wheel-tyre-system/fore. Looks like this is more important for tubeless tires. A big question in the decision is how wide the rim should be. The EN 821 and XC 721 have 21 mm rim widths and the XC 717 has a 17 mm width - hence the x21 and x17 (hey, the numbers mean something, why isn't this on the web somewhere?) The 21 mm rim widths are typically good for 35 or 37 mm (1.5 inch) to 69 mm or 76 mm (2.75 or 3 inch) tires, while the 17 mm rim is good for 25 mm (1 inch) to 52 mm (2 inch) tires. On the one hand, I doubt I'll be putting any 3" tires on the bike, but I'm also unlikely to go below a 35 mm. One of the considerations for the rims is that a narrow rim with a wide tire is more susceptible to pinch flats, so the wider rim would be preferable.
Eyelets? aaarrrghh. Traditional wheel builders seem to prefer double eyelets (which distribute load), but most rims seem to be single or non-eyelet. Arguments against non-eyelet wheels is that the spoke is loaded against the rim aluminum directly, which is more likely to result in failure. It does seem that non-eyelet is being done at the low end of the price spectrum.
Asymmetry? At the upper end, some of the rims have holes drilled to account for asymmetry in the spokes - that is the "dish" that allows the wheel to be centered while having the disc brake (in the front) and gearing (in the rear). This supposedly allows for more even spoke tension. The Mavic EN821 has this, but none of their lower end products.
After digging down further in the PricePoint web site, the EN 821 is out because they only have the 29er on sale. I'm thinking of the x19 rims, but I don't like the XM 119 as they're not eyeletted. Then I was googling around and found that travellingtwo ( http://travellingtwo.com/13732 ) has reported problems with the Mavic XM 719. So back to the drawing board...
Decided that its probably better to go cheap at this point. The Alex TD17 can be gotten for $25 each - so I'll start there and see what happens. Damn - tried to pull the trigger and only one left in stock. So back to the drawing board (again)...
UPDATE: Found some recommendations for strong (but not too heavy) low end rims - the CR18 from Sun Ringle ( http://cyclescribe.blogspot.com/2011/01/humble-rims-for-your-humble-tires.html ). I ordered a pair of rims that are black with silver sides, which were cheaper than the straight black anodized or straight silver (why?). Weird thing about online ordering - I first went through my list of online bike sites, including Niagara Cycle, where I've gotten stuff in the past. Ordering direct from Niagara included a $20 shipping charge ($10 per rim) on top of the $21 per rim. But going through Amazon I could get the rims for $23 with a $5 shipping charge (combined). OK, not so weird, except that the Amazon order is being fulfilled by Niagara Cycle. Seems like someone needs to rethink their shipping costs. The rims I ordered are 559 (26") with 17.5 mm inner cross-section and 22.5 outer cross-section widths ( http://sun-ringle.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/rim-profiles_rev_.pdf )
Some manufacturers claim their welded rims are better than pinned rims. Here I think I'll go with Roger Musson in The Professional Guide to Wheel Building: it makes no difference (you can buy a copy of the book at http://www.wheelpro.co.uk/wheelbuilding/book.php - it's definitely worth the $15 you've got to shell out). Musson argues that the strength of the wheel comes from the spokes pulling the rim inward, so that the entire rim is in compression and whether welded or pinned it will have the same basic performance. I would speculate that the failure modes under extreme stress might be slightly different - that is, they might break in a different way or at different points under extreme stress, but what the hell - the rim will be so deformed before breaking that it really shouldn't matter.
You can spend a boatload of cash on carbon rims, but that seems silly for a touring bike. I'm sticking with aluminum. At the upper end I was looking at Mavic EN 821 Disc rims, which are 21mm width, 32 hole and weigh in at 460 grams. PricePoint had them on sail for $60 (listing at $105). A similar price can be had on the Mavic XC 717 and EX 721. At the lower end, the Mavic XM 119 goes for only $25 ($38 MSRP). The EN 821 uses Mavic's FORE technology that claims stiffer and stronger http://www.mavic.us/wheel-tyre-system/fore. Looks like this is more important for tubeless tires. A big question in the decision is how wide the rim should be. The EN 821 and XC 721 have 21 mm rim widths and the XC 717 has a 17 mm width - hence the x21 and x17 (hey, the numbers mean something, why isn't this on the web somewhere?) The 21 mm rim widths are typically good for 35 or 37 mm (1.5 inch) to 69 mm or 76 mm (2.75 or 3 inch) tires, while the 17 mm rim is good for 25 mm (1 inch) to 52 mm (2 inch) tires. On the one hand, I doubt I'll be putting any 3" tires on the bike, but I'm also unlikely to go below a 35 mm. One of the considerations for the rims is that a narrow rim with a wide tire is more susceptible to pinch flats, so the wider rim would be preferable.
Eyelets? aaarrrghh. Traditional wheel builders seem to prefer double eyelets (which distribute load), but most rims seem to be single or non-eyelet. Arguments against non-eyelet wheels is that the spoke is loaded against the rim aluminum directly, which is more likely to result in failure. It does seem that non-eyelet is being done at the low end of the price spectrum.
Asymmetry? At the upper end, some of the rims have holes drilled to account for asymmetry in the spokes - that is the "dish" that allows the wheel to be centered while having the disc brake (in the front) and gearing (in the rear). This supposedly allows for more even spoke tension. The Mavic EN821 has this, but none of their lower end products.
After digging down further in the PricePoint web site, the EN 821 is out because they only have the 29er on sale. I'm thinking of the x19 rims, but I don't like the XM 119 as they're not eyeletted. Then I was googling around and found that travellingtwo ( http://travellingtwo.com/13732 ) has reported problems with the Mavic XM 719. So back to the drawing board...
Decided that its probably better to go cheap at this point. The Alex TD17 can be gotten for $25 each - so I'll start there and see what happens. Damn - tried to pull the trigger and only one left in stock. So back to the drawing board (again)...
UPDATE: Found some recommendations for strong (but not too heavy) low end rims - the CR18 from Sun Ringle ( http://cyclescribe.blogspot.com/2011/01/humble-rims-for-your-humble-tires.html ). I ordered a pair of rims that are black with silver sides, which were cheaper than the straight black anodized or straight silver (why?). Weird thing about online ordering - I first went through my list of online bike sites, including Niagara Cycle, where I've gotten stuff in the past. Ordering direct from Niagara included a $20 shipping charge ($10 per rim) on top of the $21 per rim. But going through Amazon I could get the rims for $23 with a $5 shipping charge (combined). OK, not so weird, except that the Amazon order is being fulfilled by Niagara Cycle. Seems like someone needs to rethink their shipping costs. The rims I ordered are 559 (26") with 17.5 mm inner cross-section and 22.5 outer cross-section widths ( http://sun-ringle.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/rim-profiles_rev_.pdf )
Saturday, November 14, 2015
Hubs
So the first step to building wheels is figuring out which hubs to use. This turns out to be a matter of no small consequence for your budget. After much anguish and poring through incomprehensible part names like M285 Saint, 105 5800, SRAM XO... I came away with a few insights.
First, more expensive hubs are not necessarily better for a touring bike - often you're paying for lighter weight, which might be better for racing, but less durable for touring. It seems like the best bet for a touring bike is to stick with mountain bike hubs.
Second, part numbers change on a regular basis and it's actually rather difficult to figure out which of a manufacturer's offerings are the latest, and which are leftover stock from last year. At least I couldn't find anything to tell me which was which.
Third, not being a mountain bike geek, I wasn't aware that there's a whole new hollow axle - or "through axle" or "thru axle" that's considered the latest and greatest thing. Fortunately, you've got to decide you want hollow axles when you buy your frame as they don't fit on the standard QR (quick release) mounts that have been around for decades. Since the Surly frame I've ordered has standard QR mountings, I don't have to even think about the choice.
Four - something fairly obvious, but perhaps worth noting - if you're fitting up a bike with disc brakes, then you've got to have hubs designed to mount the discs. There is an ISO standard that uses 6 bolts to mount the brake rotor. Shimano has a proprietary standard they call "Centerlock". No doubt there are other proprietary systems as well.
It seems like the "go-to" hubs for most touring bikes are Shimano; possibly because they have a wide range of capabilities and prices. The folks at TravellingTwo have been using Shimano Deore LX which are inexpensive ($15 to $25) and supposedly really sturdy. It's not clear that Shimano is still using the LX designator for these. Although you can still find Deore LX for sale on the web, Shimano doesn't have an LX on any hubs in the mountain bike section of their web site. It looks to me like the have a "Deore" without any fancy letters (model FH-M615), then the SLX and Deore XT as the next two levels up (XTR is apparently the top - but is way out of my budget).
At the end of a lot of reading and research, I still didn't (and don't) feel like I had a good idea of what hubs would be best. As I'm building on a Surly Disc Trucker frame, I decided to take a cue from their build with the older Shimano M756. That hub was superseded by the Shimano M785, and now by the M8000. Anyway, after much indecision, I found a good deal at PricePoint.com and got the XT M8000 hubs at $50 for the front and $65 for the rear. The M785 are still available online, and I could have gotten those for about $35/$50 for front/rear, but I decided to splurge and go with the latest.
A possible drawback to the M8000 is that it is only (as of Oct 2015) available in a 32 hole configuration (i.e. for 32 spokes) and most touring bikers seem to prefer 36 hole hubs. Only time will tell if I've made a mistake.
First, more expensive hubs are not necessarily better for a touring bike - often you're paying for lighter weight, which might be better for racing, but less durable for touring. It seems like the best bet for a touring bike is to stick with mountain bike hubs.
Second, part numbers change on a regular basis and it's actually rather difficult to figure out which of a manufacturer's offerings are the latest, and which are leftover stock from last year. At least I couldn't find anything to tell me which was which.
Third, not being a mountain bike geek, I wasn't aware that there's a whole new hollow axle - or "through axle" or "thru axle" that's considered the latest and greatest thing. Fortunately, you've got to decide you want hollow axles when you buy your frame as they don't fit on the standard QR (quick release) mounts that have been around for decades. Since the Surly frame I've ordered has standard QR mountings, I don't have to even think about the choice.
Four - something fairly obvious, but perhaps worth noting - if you're fitting up a bike with disc brakes, then you've got to have hubs designed to mount the discs. There is an ISO standard that uses 6 bolts to mount the brake rotor. Shimano has a proprietary standard they call "Centerlock". No doubt there are other proprietary systems as well.
It seems like the "go-to" hubs for most touring bikes are Shimano; possibly because they have a wide range of capabilities and prices. The folks at TravellingTwo have been using Shimano Deore LX which are inexpensive ($15 to $25) and supposedly really sturdy. It's not clear that Shimano is still using the LX designator for these. Although you can still find Deore LX for sale on the web, Shimano doesn't have an LX on any hubs in the mountain bike section of their web site. It looks to me like the have a "Deore" without any fancy letters (model FH-M615), then the SLX and Deore XT as the next two levels up (XTR is apparently the top - but is way out of my budget).
At the end of a lot of reading and research, I still didn't (and don't) feel like I had a good idea of what hubs would be best. As I'm building on a Surly Disc Trucker frame, I decided to take a cue from their build with the older Shimano M756. That hub was superseded by the Shimano M785, and now by the M8000. Anyway, after much indecision, I found a good deal at PricePoint.com and got the XT M8000 hubs at $50 for the front and $65 for the rear. The M785 are still available online, and I could have gotten those for about $35/$50 for front/rear, but I decided to splurge and go with the latest.
A possible drawback to the M8000 is that it is only (as of Oct 2015) available in a 32 hole configuration (i.e. for 32 spokes) and most touring bikers seem to prefer 36 hole hubs. Only time will tell if I've made a mistake.
Saturday, October 17, 2015
Make or buy wheels?
With the frame on order (a six week lead time for the S&S coupler installation) I've just been sitting around thinking about other parts of the building process. We've already figured out that we'll be using 26" wheels, but the question then is - which ones?
More importantly, should I...
...choose wheel sets from the internet,
...get someone to build some wheels for me,
...or build them myself?
Back to the interwebs.
Surprisingly (sarcasm font implied), there are arguments over what is the best book on building bike wheels.
The encyclopedia of wheel building is apparently the book by Jobst Brandt: The Bicycle Wheel, which is now in its 3rd edition. Brandt is an engineer who is apparently quite opinionated (imagine that) and calls BS on much of the trendy wheel design in industry. Although I liked a lot of the book reviews and the fact that Brandt gets into the real engineering of wheels - I decided to pass on this book as I wanted to just get down to a "what should I do" level.
After some mucking about, I ended up getting Professional Guide to Wheel Building, by Roger Musson. This is an e-book (which could be handy on the road), that you can buy directly from Roger at www.wheelpro.co.uk. It was about $15 (I haven't looked at what foreign exchange rate we got - the book is priced on line in English pounds, so your price may vary). I've read the book through (once) and it seems to be a no-nonsense guide to putting together a wheel, without a lot of extraneous stuff.
Seems to me the best reason for building the wheels myself is that I'll then really understand my wheels, so if there's a problem while touring I should be able to fix them myself. The best argument against is that I might make a complete mess of it.
After reading Musson's book, I think I can do this - with a little patience and probably a fair bit of time. The good thing about the process is that if you screw it up you just unlace all the spokes and start over. I'm looking forward to building my own wheels. I'll let you know how it goes.
More importantly, should I...
...choose wheel sets from the internet,
...get someone to build some wheels for me,
...or build them myself?
Back to the interwebs.
Surprisingly (sarcasm font implied), there are arguments over what is the best book on building bike wheels.
The encyclopedia of wheel building is apparently the book by Jobst Brandt: The Bicycle Wheel, which is now in its 3rd edition. Brandt is an engineer who is apparently quite opinionated (imagine that) and calls BS on much of the trendy wheel design in industry. Although I liked a lot of the book reviews and the fact that Brandt gets into the real engineering of wheels - I decided to pass on this book as I wanted to just get down to a "what should I do" level.
After some mucking about, I ended up getting Professional Guide to Wheel Building, by Roger Musson. This is an e-book (which could be handy on the road), that you can buy directly from Roger at www.wheelpro.co.uk. It was about $15 (I haven't looked at what foreign exchange rate we got - the book is priced on line in English pounds, so your price may vary). I've read the book through (once) and it seems to be a no-nonsense guide to putting together a wheel, without a lot of extraneous stuff.
Seems to me the best reason for building the wheels myself is that I'll then really understand my wheels, so if there's a problem while touring I should be able to fix them myself. The best argument against is that I might make a complete mess of it.
After reading Musson's book, I think I can do this - with a little patience and probably a fair bit of time. The good thing about the process is that if you screw it up you just unlace all the spokes and start over. I'm looking forward to building my own wheels. I'll let you know how it goes.
Tire size
One of the questions you have to deal with in building a touring bike is what size of wheels to use. My current bike is a standard road bike, with 700 mm wheels - so my first thought was just to stick with what I know. Then I opened up the web (often a mistake). Seems like wheel size brings out quite the collection of "expert" opinion and associated invective. I can't say that either the partisans of 26" wheels or 700 mm wheels were convincing. The basic argument for smaller wheels (26" - standard mountain bike wheels) is two-fold: (1) for size XX components (e.g. spokes, rim thickness, etc) the smaller wheel is stronger, and (2) in countries that don't have bike shops serving road racers, replacements for tubes, tires and rims for 26" wheels are really common while 700 mm stuff is rarer. The arguments for 700 mm wheels seem to be mostly that the 26" wheel arguments are bullshit and your mother wears army boots. Actually the main argument for 700 mm wheels seems to be associated with the smoothness of ride over potholes due to the larger diameter - I was thinking a bit about what the actual difference would be in the arc length of either tire and I'm not convinced - I'll agree that a 10" or 14" wheel would feel really different over potholes, but I can't see the difference between the 26" and 700 mm rims being significant compared to the rim width, tire diameter, and inflation pressure.
Then I started reading about the (relatively) new 29'er wheels (which are really 700 mm rims that can handle wider tires) and decided to shut down my computer.
In the end, Surly Bikes came to our rescue - for short people (frames smaller than 56 cm) the Disc Trucker is only designed for 26" wheels. This makes a lot of sense to me, because the larger wheels on smaller frames can lead to an "overlap" problem - where turning the front wheel at low speed puts the tire into the rider's foot if the pedal is all the way forward - not something you really want to happen with fully loaded panniers. So we'll be using 26" wheels.
Then I started reading about the (relatively) new 29'er wheels (which are really 700 mm rims that can handle wider tires) and decided to shut down my computer.
In the end, Surly Bikes came to our rescue - for short people (frames smaller than 56 cm) the Disc Trucker is only designed for 26" wheels. This makes a lot of sense to me, because the larger wheels on smaller frames can lead to an "overlap" problem - where turning the front wheel at low speed puts the tire into the rider's foot if the pedal is all the way forward - not something you really want to happen with fully loaded panniers. So we'll be using 26" wheels.
Bike Frame Measurements
In a prior post, I mentioned that it was measurements of the bike frame (for small riders) that drove our decision to go with the Surly Disc Trucker. Just for my own records, here's the Surly measurements for both the Disc Trucker and World Troller.
Bike frame measurement definitions
(from Surly Bikes)
Disc Trucker Measurements (inches)
World Troller measurements (inches)
Measurements from my Felt road bike (inches)
To be added later
Friday, October 9, 2015
Touring bike frame
So the frame and fork is obviously the place to start when building a touring bike. We started with the idea that we wanted disc brakes - my old hands with weak grip strength don't need to be yanking back on a v-pull with a heavily loaded bike. If you aren't up on bike building (e.g., me) the choice of conventional brakes or disc is built into the frame (although some frames can handle both). After a fair bit of mucking about, I settled on one of two possibilities, both from Surly Bikes. They sell the World Troller frame with the S&S couplers (see previous post) built in at the factory and the Disc Trucker without the couplers (so we would have to get them installed after market).
The World Troller seemed like the no brainer option, but once we started looking at frame sizing, we found that we'd rather have the Disc Trucker. The Troller is designed for absolutely everything, which would be great if we were doing adventure touring with lots of off-road segments. But we're planning to be more conventional, mostly on roads and (at worst) gravel bike paths. The main drawback for the Troller is that they don't have as many size options. Furthermore, the Disc Trucker has 2" longer chainstays and a slightly greater BB drop. The former, in theory, should provide more stability with a longer wheelbase - but more importantly provides extra heel clearance to help keep you from hitting panniers. The BB drop is more obscure, but it puts your bottom bracket (where you pedal around) a little closer to the ground so you get a little lower center of gravity. Of course, if you go screaming around a corner with a deep lean and with your pedal at bottom stroke, the larger BB drop could cause a bit of a problem. But being short people, the real critical factor was the frame sizing options, and the Disc Trucker simply fit both of us better.
Anyway, the Disc Trucker seemed like what we wanted, but it doesn't come with S&S couplers so the big question was whether we could get a reasonable price on installation. We found a good deal by talking with Bilenky Cycles in Philadelphia. They're a Surly dealer as well as a machine shop with experience in installing the couplers. They're working on our first frame now. Check back in November to see what it looks like.
Anyway, the Disc Trucker seemed like what we wanted, but it doesn't come with S&S couplers so the big question was whether we could get a reasonable price on installation. We found a good deal by talking with Bilenky Cycles in Philadelphia. They're a Surly dealer as well as a machine shop with experience in installing the couplers. They're working on our first frame now. Check back in November to see what it looks like.
Getting started
A couple months ago we started thinking about doing some bike touring. We were in Europe in August and did some one-day bike rentals - quite enjoyed it (despite the sketchy bikes). We've done multi-day supported road bike rides in the past (Ride the Rockies most notably), so I figured it wouldn't take too much to get used to carrying gear. My first instinct was just to buy a couple inexpensive touring bikes and go for it. Then I started looking into the costs to fly bikes between the U.S. and Europe. It doesn't take but 3 trips and the bike baggage fees will dwarf the cost of a cheap bike.
After some looking about, it appears that the best option (for us, anyway) is bikes with S&S Couplers that allow a bike frame to be split into 2 pieces and the entire bike packed up into a case that an be checked as regular luggage. After looking at some bikes that are sold with couplers installed (which isn't very many), we decided (well, I decided and got reluctant/skeptical agreement from my better half - who has watched a number of projects get stalled only half-finished) to build our tour bikes from components.
As I started down this path, I realized there's a lot of little decisions made along the way, which really should be jotted down in a notebook for future reference. Hence, this blog.
After some looking about, it appears that the best option (for us, anyway) is bikes with S&S Couplers that allow a bike frame to be split into 2 pieces and the entire bike packed up into a case that an be checked as regular luggage. After looking at some bikes that are sold with couplers installed (which isn't very many), we decided (well, I decided and got reluctant/skeptical agreement from my better half - who has watched a number of projects get stalled only half-finished) to build our tour bikes from components.
As I started down this path, I realized there's a lot of little decisions made along the way, which really should be jotted down in a notebook for future reference. Hence, this blog.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)