Back to wheels today (and so on).
Continuing from the other day.
I'm going to rebuild the front wheel on the Rapide CLX.
It's a front wheel with all Aero Lite spokes in a ridiculous 2:1 lacing pattern with just 18 holes total.
If I didn't rebuild it and just inspected it as-is with all Aero Lites,
it would also be correct if I could give a valid reason,
it would also be correct if I switched the low-spoke side to CX Sprint and did reverse-radial asymmetric lacing,
it would also be correct if I got worried about the low spoke count—less spokes means fewer total spokes in the wheel—
and went with all CX Sprint instead.
It's difficult.
But when I checked the spoke tension
on both sides across all spokes,
even with tension variance among spokes on the same side,
the minimum tension on the high-tension side
exceeded the maximum tension on the low-tension side,
so I thought there was value in changing the spoke proportion on the low-spoke side
and decided to rebuild it.
As for this wheel,
if the hub design were a bit better—
if the large flange dimensions,
spoke head position,
and spoke path were better—
it would be fine to keep it as same-diameter lacing on both sides
(just inspect it as-is or convert everything to CX Sprint).
There are actual examples of this.
The Campagnolo Bora DB.
The Bora's G3 lacing does have the high-spoke side at higher tension,
but the difference in spoke tension between left and right is so minimal that
sometimes the maximum tension spoke on the low-spoke side is actually higher
than the minimum tension spoke on the high-spoke side.
Built it.
I switched the low-spoke side to CX Sprint.
The final crossing on the high-spoke side
wasn't braced before,
and even though I completely disassembled it during the rebuild,
I didn't brace or build it in again.
The final crossing is so close to the hub flange that
bracing would have almost no effect, so I skip it.
If I were going to do it, I'd need to brace the final crossing.
After rebuilding,
the spoke tension on the high-spoke side
clearly increased.
If someone said to just tension this without the reverse-radial asymmetric lacing
and leave it at that,
the low-spoke side would feel like it's about to burst,
so it's extremely difficult.
This pair of front and rear wheels has a front rim at 51mm depth
and rear rim at 60mm depth, but
because they're pursuing aerodynamic performance including the shape of the mounted tire,
the front rim has a
wider bead-hook width than the rear
(right side of the image above).
So despite the rim depth difference,
the front rim ends up heavier.
As far as I know, among the actual measured examples,
I've never seen this reversed on any pair of Rapide CLX front and rear wheels.
I'm not about to share the specific weights though.
↑wow this guy's got bad vibes
Sorry for the wait! Please take a look at this image!
Rear rim!
Front rim!
↑Cut it out already!
Continuing from the other day.
I'm going to rebuild the front wheel on the Rapide CLX.
It's a front wheel with all Aero Lite spokes in a ridiculous 2:1 lacing pattern with just 18 holes total.
If I didn't rebuild it and just inspected it as-is with all Aero Lites,
it would also be correct if I could give a valid reason,
it would also be correct if I switched the low-spoke side to CX Sprint and did reverse-radial asymmetric lacing,
it would also be correct if I got worried about the low spoke count—less spokes means fewer total spokes in the wheel—
and went with all CX Sprint instead.
It's difficult.
But when I checked the spoke tension
on both sides across all spokes,
even with tension variance among spokes on the same side,
the minimum tension on the high-tension side
exceeded the maximum tension on the low-tension side,
so I thought there was value in changing the spoke proportion on the low-spoke side
and decided to rebuild it.
As for this wheel,
if the hub design were a bit better—
if the large flange dimensions,
spoke head position,
and spoke path were better—
it would be fine to keep it as same-diameter lacing on both sides
(just inspect it as-is or convert everything to CX Sprint).
There are actual examples of this.
The Campagnolo Bora DB.
The Bora's G3 lacing does have the high-spoke side at higher tension,
but the difference in spoke tension between left and right is so minimal that
sometimes the maximum tension spoke on the low-spoke side is actually higher
than the minimum tension spoke on the high-spoke side.
Built it.
I switched the low-spoke side to CX Sprint.
The final crossing on the high-spoke side
wasn't braced before,
and even though I completely disassembled it during the rebuild,
I didn't brace or build it in again.
The final crossing is so close to the hub flange that
bracing would have almost no effect, so I skip it.
If I were going to do it, I'd need to brace the final crossing.
After rebuilding,
the spoke tension on the high-spoke side
clearly increased.
If someone said to just tension this without the reverse-radial asymmetric lacing
and leave it at that,
the low-spoke side would feel like it's about to burst,
so it's extremely difficult.
This pair of front and rear wheels has a front rim at 51mm depth
and rear rim at 60mm depth, but
because they're pursuing aerodynamic performance including the shape of the mounted tire,
the front rim has a
wider bead-hook width than the rear
(right side of the image above).
So despite the rim depth difference,
the front rim ends up heavier.
As far as I know, among the actual measured examples,
I've never seen this reversed on any pair of Rapide CLX front and rear wheels.
I'm not about to share the specific weights though.
↑wow this guy's got bad vibes
Sorry for the wait! Please take a look at this image!
Rear rim!
Front rim!
↑Cut it out already!