Another wheel day (and so on).
Continuing from yesterday.
I'm rebuilding the rear wheel on a Rovale C38.
DT 370 hub, 24H, all-black Competition Lace
Four-four JIS lacing.
I didn't mention this when doing the front wheel, but
between the spoke shoulders and the hub flanges
there was salt corrosion that couldn't be explained
by material potential difference alone.
The image above shows the freewheel side of the rear wheel,
but the front wheel was far, far worse.
The spokes had paint coating, and the hub flanges had anodize plating,
so the rust didn't completely penetrate those protective layers.
What happened was saltwater spray repeatedly
splattered and dried.
I'm guessing the bike had a long history
of indoor trainer use.
Rebuilt.
DT 370 hub, 24H, half CX Sprint
Four-six JIS lacing
with iridescent (VAS) arrangement nipples.
I'll lace the wheel later.
↑This is the freewheel-side hub flange
viewed from the outside.
I'm threading outpokes through the flange holes
that show inpoke marks.
As to why I didn't follow the original lacing pattern—
With the original lacing pattern, the hub body's
model name marking position and
the valve hole position didn't align
nearly as well.
Since there were chain oil splatter marks
almost exclusively on the right side of the rim,
I wiped it clean.
As for the C38 rim weight,
it's about the same as the company's CLX 50 rim.
The absolute weights are similar but rim heights differ,
so when accounting for relative weight by rim depth,
the CLX 50 is definitely superior.
However, the CLX 50 has rimholes without rest phase,
and uses XI lacing with 2:1 patterns.
If you're building the same full-aero lightweight at 24H,
regular 4-4 lacing would be better—that's how dumb
the 2:1 pattern is. And even though it's 24H and not 21H,
the rim hole spacing follows a clear
right-right-left (left-left-right) × 8 pattern,
so you can't rebuild it with left-right × 12. Plus—
↑Where genuine DT uses 6902 bearings,
the Rovale hub with DT-made drum-shaped bodies
uses 6802 bearings instead,
which has a defect where the bearings fail immediately
when you tighten the through-axle.
So if you're rebuilding anyway,
the C38 has far more upside potential
than the CLX 50.
If I could choose between a CLX 50 and a C38,
I'd definitely pick the C38.
The Specialized shops that sell Rovale wheels
have neither the imagination nor the skill to rebuild them.
Beyond just marking up what the manufacturer says is expensive
and selling it to customers as better,
they can't do anything else.
As for the C38 rim weight,
I'm not going to tell anyone more than
that it's about the same as the CLX 50.
↑aw man this guy's got bad vibes
Waiiiiit, pleeeease look at this image!
It's the front wheel's riiiim!
It's the rear wheel's riiiim!
↑Stop iiiiit!
Continuing from yesterday.
I'm rebuilding the rear wheel on a Rovale C38.
DT 370 hub, 24H, all-black Competition Lace
Four-four JIS lacing.
I didn't mention this when doing the front wheel, but
between the spoke shoulders and the hub flanges
there was salt corrosion that couldn't be explained
by material potential difference alone.
The image above shows the freewheel side of the rear wheel,
but the front wheel was far, far worse.
The spokes had paint coating, and the hub flanges had anodize plating,
so the rust didn't completely penetrate those protective layers.
What happened was saltwater spray repeatedly
splattered and dried.
I'm guessing the bike had a long history
of indoor trainer use.
Rebuilt.
DT 370 hub, 24H, half CX Sprint
Four-six JIS lacing
with iridescent (VAS) arrangement nipples.
I'll lace the wheel later.
↑This is the freewheel-side hub flange
viewed from the outside.
I'm threading outpokes through the flange holes
that show inpoke marks.
As to why I didn't follow the original lacing pattern—
With the original lacing pattern, the hub body's
model name marking position and
the valve hole position didn't align
nearly as well.
Since there were chain oil splatter marks
almost exclusively on the right side of the rim,
I wiped it clean.
As for the C38 rim weight,
it's about the same as the company's CLX 50 rim.
The absolute weights are similar but rim heights differ,
so when accounting for relative weight by rim depth,
the CLX 50 is definitely superior.
However, the CLX 50 has rimholes without rest phase,
and uses XI lacing with 2:1 patterns.
If you're building the same full-aero lightweight at 24H,
regular 4-4 lacing would be better—that's how dumb
the 2:1 pattern is. And even though it's 24H and not 21H,
the rim hole spacing follows a clear
right-right-left (left-left-right) × 8 pattern,
so you can't rebuild it with left-right × 12. Plus—
↑Where genuine DT uses 6902 bearings,
the Rovale hub with DT-made drum-shaped bodies
uses 6802 bearings instead,
which has a defect where the bearings fail immediately
when you tighten the through-axle.
So if you're rebuilding anyway,
the C38 has far more upside potential
than the CLX 50.
If I could choose between a CLX 50 and a C38,
I'd definitely pick the C38.
The Specialized shops that sell Rovale wheels
have neither the imagination nor the skill to rebuild them.
Beyond just marking up what the manufacturer says is expensive
and selling it to customers as better,
they can't do anything else.
As for the C38 rim weight,
I'm not going to tell anyone more than
that it's about the same as the CLX 50.
↑aw man this guy's got bad vibes
Waiiiiit, pleeeease look at this image!
It's the front wheel's riiiim!
It's the rear wheel's riiiim!
↑Stop iiiiit!