Today it's wheelbuilding (and so on). But first.
I received a comment about the front wheel of the Rapide CLX.
"Regarding the rim hook on the Rapide CLX front wheel,
it's not thick for aerodynamics,
but the hook is hollow for weight reduction,
so it appears thicker."
But no matter how I think about it, it's not for weight reduction.
Because it's not actually lighter.
With the Rapide CLX, compared to the CLX 50 rim,
changing the internal rim width would alter the tire profile,
so they've only widened the external rim width.
Evidence it's not a weight reduction—Point 1
Compared to the CLX 50 rim, the Rapide CLX has
nearly the same rim height, but the stated weight of the front wheel is
CLX 50 (naturally disc) at 645g,
and Rapide CLX at 649g.
Wow! Nearly the same rim height but with increased rim width,
you might think the Rapide CLX has a better height-to-weight ratio!
But the Rapide CLX front wheel is 18-hole.
Since this isn't confidential information anymore, I'll write it out:
the spoke length and count for the front wheel are
CLX 50: 255mm×14 spokes + 256mm×7 spokes (21 total),
Rapide CLX: 252mm×12 spokes + 257mm×6 spokes (18 total),
and applying spoke specific gravity to calculate
the total spoke weight difference,
the Rapide CLX is 13.1g lighter in spokes.
Also, 3 fewer nipples at roughly 1g each,
so the Rapide CLX has about 14g advantage over the CLX 50
in spokes and nipples combined, yet the entire front wheel
is actually 4g heavier.
And in reality, the Rapide CLX rim
is about 18g heavier than the CLX 50 rim,
and that's just a consequence of the increased rim width.
I'll be clear: the Rapide CLX rim
has an inferior height-to-weight ratio compared to the CLX 50 rim.
Evidence it's not a weight reduction—Point 2
The rear wheel's 60mm-deep rim with
no increase in rim width but 10mm greater rim height compared to the CLX 50 rim—
the Rapide CLX is actually lighter than the CLX 50 rim.
The reason it's lighter is the rim sidewalls are noticeably thinner.
In fact, the Rapide CLX's 24-hole rear rim,
if you were to build a 24-hole/60mm-deep "front wheel"
using Roval's front hub with flanges drilled for 24-holes,
would still be lighter than the Rapide CLX's 18-hole/51mm-deep front wheel,
even with the handicap of 6 additional spokes.
If you simply wanted a lighter front wheel, you could just use the same rear rim
and build front and rear wheels with 21-hole or 18-hole 60mm-deep rims.
Evidence it's not a weight reduction—Point 3
If a hollow hook wide rim were lighter than a same-height rim without one,
there'd be no reason not to adopt it on the Alpinist CLX,
which emphasizes weight even more.
Evidence it's not a weight reduction—Point 4
At least on the manufacturer's website, the explanation for why the Rapide CLX
rim shape differs between front and rear wheels mentions
"the front wheel is the first part to encounter wind" and
"experiences 25% less side wind influence than the CLX 50,"
with language focused on aerodynamics,
but no mention of weight considerations.
Anyway,
today it's wheelbuilding (and so on).
I'm rebuilding the Rapide CLX rear wheel.
This rim doesn't come close to my personal
Edge 65 rim's height-to-weight ratio of 66mm/378g,
but it's wrong to even compare it to an out-of-production tubular narrow rim—
what was historically the strongest rim in the 60mm-deep and above category.
While this rim isn't tubeless-compatible,
it might be the strongest-class WO rim
in the 60mm-deep and above department (or rather, at 60mm-deep),
and it's over 30g lighter than the Bora WTO 60 at the same rim depth.
If it weren't for the 2:1 spoke drilling pattern,
I might have bought just the rear wheel, since Roval
sells front and rear wheels separately.
The temporary center is off a bit, which is fine,
but we received it with the sprocket and disc rotor attached,
yet the freewheel splines look pristine with almost no signs of use.
It's clear it wasn't brought in immediately after purchase.
With this wheel, the spoke procurement is part of the reason,
but the rebuild turnaround time is several months, so
rather than having it sit at the shop all that time,
the owner was told to just bring it back in a few months
and we'd get right on it, which is why we didn't take it in
several months ago.
It's built.
I went with mysterious square aero spokes on the non-drive side.
The lacing (at 8 positions on the drive side) will be done later.
With the Rapide CLX, we've previously had one instance of a front wheel rebuild
from complete disassembly.
Regarding wheels, there are people who talk about all sorts of things
based on the manufacturer's stated weight and
actual measured wheel weight (←you don't need skill just to know this)
and "rough estimate rim weight" derived from those figures,
but if you get the chance, just disassemble it.
Oh, even if you get the chance, you don't have the skill to reassemble it!
That never occurred to me. Sorry.
And of course, I have no intention of telling you this rim's weight.
↑Wow, what a disagreeable character. Who do you think you are?
Thank you for waiting! Please view this image!
This time's front rim!
This time's rear rim!
Regarding the front rims from last time and the time before (→Here) !
↑Stop it!
I received a comment about the front wheel of the Rapide CLX.
"Regarding the rim hook on the Rapide CLX front wheel,
it's not thick for aerodynamics,
but the hook is hollow for weight reduction,
so it appears thicker."
But no matter how I think about it, it's not for weight reduction.
Because it's not actually lighter.
With the Rapide CLX, compared to the CLX 50 rim,
changing the internal rim width would alter the tire profile,
so they've only widened the external rim width.
Evidence it's not a weight reduction—Point 1
Compared to the CLX 50 rim, the Rapide CLX has
nearly the same rim height, but the stated weight of the front wheel is
CLX 50 (naturally disc) at 645g,
and Rapide CLX at 649g.
Wow! Nearly the same rim height but with increased rim width,
you might think the Rapide CLX has a better height-to-weight ratio!
But the Rapide CLX front wheel is 18-hole.
Since this isn't confidential information anymore, I'll write it out:
the spoke length and count for the front wheel are
CLX 50: 255mm×14 spokes + 256mm×7 spokes (21 total),
Rapide CLX: 252mm×12 spokes + 257mm×6 spokes (18 total),
and applying spoke specific gravity to calculate
the total spoke weight difference,
the Rapide CLX is 13.1g lighter in spokes.
Also, 3 fewer nipples at roughly 1g each,
so the Rapide CLX has about 14g advantage over the CLX 50
in spokes and nipples combined, yet the entire front wheel
is actually 4g heavier.
And in reality, the Rapide CLX rim
is about 18g heavier than the CLX 50 rim,
and that's just a consequence of the increased rim width.
I'll be clear: the Rapide CLX rim
has an inferior height-to-weight ratio compared to the CLX 50 rim.
Evidence it's not a weight reduction—Point 2
The rear wheel's 60mm-deep rim with
no increase in rim width but 10mm greater rim height compared to the CLX 50 rim—
the Rapide CLX is actually lighter than the CLX 50 rim.
The reason it's lighter is the rim sidewalls are noticeably thinner.
In fact, the Rapide CLX's 24-hole rear rim,
if you were to build a 24-hole/60mm-deep "front wheel"
using Roval's front hub with flanges drilled for 24-holes,
would still be lighter than the Rapide CLX's 18-hole/51mm-deep front wheel,
even with the handicap of 6 additional spokes.
If you simply wanted a lighter front wheel, you could just use the same rear rim
and build front and rear wheels with 21-hole or 18-hole 60mm-deep rims.
Evidence it's not a weight reduction—Point 3
If a hollow hook wide rim were lighter than a same-height rim without one,
there'd be no reason not to adopt it on the Alpinist CLX,
which emphasizes weight even more.
Evidence it's not a weight reduction—Point 4
At least on the manufacturer's website, the explanation for why the Rapide CLX
rim shape differs between front and rear wheels mentions
"the front wheel is the first part to encounter wind" and
"experiences 25% less side wind influence than the CLX 50,"
with language focused on aerodynamics,
but no mention of weight considerations.
Anyway,
today it's wheelbuilding (and so on).
I'm rebuilding the Rapide CLX rear wheel.
This rim doesn't come close to my personal
Edge 65 rim's height-to-weight ratio of 66mm/378g,
but it's wrong to even compare it to an out-of-production tubular narrow rim—
what was historically the strongest rim in the 60mm-deep and above category.
While this rim isn't tubeless-compatible,
it might be the strongest-class WO rim
in the 60mm-deep and above department (or rather, at 60mm-deep),
and it's over 30g lighter than the Bora WTO 60 at the same rim depth.
If it weren't for the 2:1 spoke drilling pattern,
I might have bought just the rear wheel, since Roval
sells front and rear wheels separately.
The temporary center is off a bit, which is fine,
but we received it with the sprocket and disc rotor attached,
yet the freewheel splines look pristine with almost no signs of use.
It's clear it wasn't brought in immediately after purchase.
With this wheel, the spoke procurement is part of the reason,
but the rebuild turnaround time is several months, so
rather than having it sit at the shop all that time,
the owner was told to just bring it back in a few months
and we'd get right on it, which is why we didn't take it in
several months ago.
It's built.
I went with mysterious square aero spokes on the non-drive side.
The lacing (at 8 positions on the drive side) will be done later.
With the Rapide CLX, we've previously had one instance of a front wheel rebuild
from complete disassembly.
Regarding wheels, there are people who talk about all sorts of things
based on the manufacturer's stated weight and
actual measured wheel weight (←you don't need skill just to know this)
and "rough estimate rim weight" derived from those figures,
but if you get the chance, just disassemble it.
Oh, even if you get the chance, you don't have the skill to reassemble it!
That never occurred to me. Sorry.
And of course, I have no intention of telling you this rim's weight.
↑Wow, what a disagreeable character. Who do you think you are?
Thank you for waiting! Please view this image!
This time's front rim!
This time's rear rim!
Regarding the front rims from last time and the time before (→Here) !
↑Stop it!