A customer brought in a Bontrager MTB wheel for me to work on.
The request was to increase the spoke tension if possible, as it seems a bit low.
Indeed, the non-drive side spoke tension was a bit slack,
but the wheel was perfectly centered.
In cases like this, it would be really helpful if the drive side was the one that was off-center.
The only thing I can do is
"Tighten the drive side as much as possible → then tighten the non-drive side back to the point where center is regained."
But since the drive side spokes are nearly vertical compared to the non-drive side,
each full turn of the nipple doesn't shift the rim sideways as much as on the non-drive side.
Plus, since this rim is unfamiliar to me, I can't just crank up the spoke tension willy-nilly,
and it's brain-wave controlled!
And the fact that it's an eyeletless rim with aluminum nipples, but no rim preparation was done, means
that even after oiling the contact points, the nipples don't turn smoothly and nicely.
Wheels are truly stubborn things!
To cut to the chase, I did manage to increase the tension somewhat, but only by a tiny amount.
If I could disassemble the wheel and replace the aluminum nipples,
I think I could push it a bit further...
By the way, it's an offset rim. Smart choice there.
The front wheel didn't have any issues worth noting.
Perfect centering, virtually no wobble.
With this type of straight-pull spoke flange configuration,
if you consider the spokes on the outer side of both left and right to be like the "nub spokes" of a bent-elbow spoke,
then this wheel is built Italian style.
The rear wheel, on the other hand, is built in reverse-JIS style. That's uncommon.
Both are opposite to how Shimano MTB wheels are typically built.
Actually, I received a comment the other day suggesting that
when the drive-side spokes on the rear wheel going toward the porcupine direction are configured as nub spokes (Italian/JIS)
versus non-nub spokes (reverse-Italian/reverse-JIS), the latter might have superior anti-torsion performance.
There's certainly merit to that argument, but when you consider everything holistically,
I think the Italian/JIS configuration is actually the better approach for the drive side.
That said, I wouldn't go so far as to say this Bontrager is wrong.
↑Shot from the rotor side, so it's a reverse-offset rim.
By "reverse," I mean the rim hole offset direction is opposite to the rear wheel,
but the direction the rim holes are dished toward relative to the spoke flange is the same on both front and rear.
To be precise, it's just that the front hub's spoke flange dish
is opposite to the rear hub's.
Since the dish reason is the rotor mount rather than the freebody,
the dishing amount is smaller, so the offset rim's correction capability is on the larger side.
Man, this front wheel is truly exceptional.
The request was to increase the spoke tension if possible, as it seems a bit low.
Indeed, the non-drive side spoke tension was a bit slack,
but the wheel was perfectly centered.
In cases like this, it would be really helpful if the drive side was the one that was off-center.
The only thing I can do is
"Tighten the drive side as much as possible → then tighten the non-drive side back to the point where center is regained."
But since the drive side spokes are nearly vertical compared to the non-drive side,
each full turn of the nipple doesn't shift the rim sideways as much as on the non-drive side.
Plus, since this rim is unfamiliar to me, I can't just crank up the spoke tension willy-nilly,
And the fact that it's an eyeletless rim with aluminum nipples, but no rim preparation was done, means
that even after oiling the contact points, the nipples don't turn smoothly and nicely.
Wheels are truly stubborn things!
To cut to the chase, I did manage to increase the tension somewhat, but only by a tiny amount.
If I could disassemble the wheel and replace the aluminum nipples,
I think I could push it a bit further...
By the way, it's an offset rim. Smart choice there.
The front wheel didn't have any issues worth noting.
Perfect centering, virtually no wobble.
With this type of straight-pull spoke flange configuration,
if you consider the spokes on the outer side of both left and right to be like the "nub spokes" of a bent-elbow spoke,
then this wheel is built Italian style.
The rear wheel, on the other hand, is built in reverse-JIS style. That's uncommon.
Both are opposite to how Shimano MTB wheels are typically built.
Actually, I received a comment the other day suggesting that
when the drive-side spokes on the rear wheel going toward the porcupine direction are configured as nub spokes (Italian/JIS)
versus non-nub spokes (reverse-Italian/reverse-JIS), the latter might have superior anti-torsion performance.
There's certainly merit to that argument, but when you consider everything holistically,
I think the Italian/JIS configuration is actually the better approach for the drive side.
That said, I wouldn't go so far as to say this Bontrager is wrong.
↑Shot from the rotor side, so it's a reverse-offset rim.
By "reverse," I mean the rim hole offset direction is opposite to the rear wheel,
but the direction the rim holes are dished toward relative to the spoke flange is the same on both front and rear.
To be precise, it's just that the front hub's spoke flange dish
is opposite to the rear hub's.
Since the dish reason is the rotor mount rather than the freebody,
the dishing amount is smaller, so the offset rim's correction capability is on the larger side.
Man, this front wheel is truly exceptional.