Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 374
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pau11y's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    7,109

    PSA: LB 650b X-Wide rim

    Was talking to Nancy over email about extra wide 650b rims and she sent this: $175/ea @ 400g, +/- 15g

    PSA: LB 650b X-Wide rim-new-650b-hookless-35w-25d.jpg
    Naysayers never apologize. Critics go to their grave thinking everyone else is wrong.
    ╭∩╮( º.º )╭∩╮

  2. #2
    ride all day
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    190
    Looks sweet! The only reason for me to get these over the Derby's would be price, will have to see how these compare

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ramjm_2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,122
    Looks very similar to the new Roval rim. Me likey...may have to build a set up!

  4. #4
    LyN
    LyN is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    38
    Is this rim already available to buy?

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    719
    They are ready to order, I just got an invoice to order. Disappointed in the spokes though. The Pillar 1420 bladed spokes are $1.60 per spoke. I already have my new 40T Hope Hubs. Does this price seem excessive? Anything close for a lower price to recommend?

  6. #6
    banned
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    2,895
    These do not seem to have the UST-like bead locks like the Derby rims, and their rim walls are thinner, too. I am looking forward to seeing ride reports but I am quite sure they are never going to replace my precious Derbys.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ramjm_2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,122
    Quote Originally Posted by dawgman25 View Post
    They are ready to order, I just got an invoice to order. Disappointed in the spokes though. The Pillar 1420 bladed spokes are $1.60 per spoke. I already have my new 40T Hope Hubs. Does this price seem excessive? Anything close for a lower price to recommend?
    I ordered a set and went with the pilars. Cost wise they $1.60 is very reasonable for a bladed black ano spoke thats competitive weight and strength wise to the revos. I'll be pairing them up with a set of EVO2s as well. I havent heard anything about a new tooth configuration for the rear hub, is this a new model? replacing the 24T? or a special order?

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ramjm_2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,122
    Quote Originally Posted by StiHacka View Post
    These do not seem to have the UST-like bead locks like the Derby rims, and their rim walls are thinner, too. I am looking forward to seeing ride reports but I am quite sure they are never going to replace my precious Derbys.
    Derby's rims look good but the width is a bit too extreme for my taste...they seem to square off the tire a bit much for the riding I do. I was on the fence with the Rovals or a set of the iplay 30mm hooked rim. When these Roval clones came out in a not so extreme width I took the plung.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    2,054
    Quote Originally Posted by Ramjm_2000 View Post
    I'll be pairing them up with a set of EVO2s as well. I havent heard anything about a new tooth configuration for the rear hub, is this a new model? replacing the 24T? or a special order?
    They are a replacement of the old model and came out in October iirc.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    719
    Did your order come with nipples as well?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ramjm_2000 View Post
    I ordered a set and went with the pilars. Cost wise they $1.60 is very reasonable for a bladed black ano spoke thats competitive weight and strength wise to the revos. I'll be pairing them up with a set of EVO2s as well. I havent heard anything about a new tooth configuration for the rear hub, is this a new model? replacing the 24T? or a special order?

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    187

    hooked

    If you're looking for a hooked rims, I got a set of the iplay 35mm hooked rims (mounted to Novetec hubs with Sapim CX-Delta spokes). I couldn't be happier. Peter was very professional and the wheels were flawlessly built. I thought my Bronson was good before, but with these wheels it feels like an even better bike. Totally recommend.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails PSA: LB 650b X-Wide rim-img_6054.jpg  

    PSA: LB 650b X-Wide rim-ip-rm735c-27.5er-am-rim-geometry.jpg  


  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9,797
    Quote Originally Posted by Pau11y View Post
    Was talking to Nancy over email about extra wide 650b rims and she sent this: $175/ea @ 400g, +/- 15g

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	new 650B hookless-35W-25D.jpg 
Views:	1782 
Size:	54.7 KB 
ID:	850416
    I can't find them on the LB website to order them. Do you have to email her to get some?
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    101
    Quote Originally Posted by gfowkes View Post
    If you're looking for a hooked rims, I got a set of the iplay 35mm hooked rims (mounted to Novetec hubs with Sapim CX-Delta spokes). I couldn't be happier. Peter was very professional and the wheels were flawlessly built. I thought my Bronson was good before, but with these wheels it feels like an even better bike. Totally recommend.
    How much including shipping?

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: doismellbacon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,332
    If something can be perfectly excessive, then I agree entirely!
    Seriously though, my fears about overly square tires on the Derby's were unfounded, and I strongly disagree with any conjecture about the Derby rim width being excessive. Game changing? Yes.
    After riding mine for a couple months now, and recently spending some time riding my ti hardtail with Stan's 355 650b, and a brand new Ripley 29er with Arch EX's, I'm reminded of how completely awesome the Derby's are .... mainly because of that wide profile and the grip and cushioning it brings to the table... but they're also smooth-riding, light, and stiff stiff stiff.....
    Going in, I had concerns about squared off tires, but it's not an issue with Neo Moto, Nevegal 2.35, and Mavic Crossroc Roams I've ridden on them.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ramjm_2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,122
    I'm glad you've had such a great experience but for me (again my preference) I prefer a more slightly rounded profile and a bit more side wall protection. I personally don't think the current batch of tires that I like are suited for the 40mm width unless I were to switch to a bigger tire. I rode some Gordos and P35s and loved the ride just hated the weight, I'm looking forward to these as a compromise between a know (35mm width) and an unknown (hookless).

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    2,018
    Quote Originally Posted by Ramjm_2000 View Post
    Derby's rims look good but the width is a bit too extreme for my taste...they seem to square off the tire a bit much for the riding I do. I was on the fence with the Rovals or a set of the iplay 30mm hooked rim. When these Roval clones came out in a not so extreme width I took the plung.
    The inner width between the Derby and the rim in the OP is 4mm.....or 2mm per side. I would be curious to see tire measurements of identical tires mounted on the two rims. I doubt you will see any difference in tire footprint or shape. The Derby rim should theoretically build up "stiffer" with the much deeper rim profile.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9,797
    The rim width and tire profile work together. So some tires might be fine on a particularly wide rim and others might not. You have to look at specific pairings.

    I've used tires on really wide rims that changed their profile enough that handling was compromised like Ranjm is talking about. YMMV - it's just worth being aware of - not necessarily a deal breaker.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ramjm_2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,122
    Quote Originally Posted by 88 rex View Post
    The inner width between the Derby and the rim in the OP is 4mm.....or 2mm per side. I would be curious to see tire measurements of identical tires mounted on the two rims. I doubt you will see any difference in tire footprint or shape. The Derby rim should theoretically build up "stiffer" with the much deeper rim profile.
    I'm looking forward to finding out...

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ramjm_2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,122
    Vik...concur 100%

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9,797
    I assume no issues setting these rims up tubeless with Stan's sealant?

    What about corrosion issues between the spoke nipples and the rim? Do you guys use brass or AL nipples with carbon?
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    2,018
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    I assume no issues setting these rims up tubeless with Stan's sealant?

    What about corrosion issues between the spoke nipples and the rim? Do you guys use brass or AL nipples with carbon?
    I've used both and never had a problem on carbon rims.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ramjm_2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,122
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    I assume no issues setting these rims up tubeless with Stan's sealant?

    What about corrosion issues between the spoke nipples and the rim? Do you guys use brass or AL nipples with carbon?
    Will be using ano alloy nips with stan's tape. I quit using stan's liquid a few years ago, been using caffe latex with great success. I have a local euro brand non-corrosive product that I'm probably going to give a try as well.

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pau11y's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    7,109
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    I can't find them on the LB website to order them. Do you have to email her to get some?
    Yeah, email her.
    Naysayers never apologize. Critics go to their grave thinking everyone else is wrong.
    ╭∩╮( º.º )╭∩╮

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pau11y's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    7,109
    I'm still tossing around these vs their 23mm internal width ones in my head...

    Weight isn't too much of an issue at 400g for these, but the tire size commitment is. I'm running Minion DHF/DHR2, 2.52.3 on my 29er version of the LB "Wider" (23mm) rim and getting fantastic results on a Tallboy LTc. But this 650b conversion project of my Blur LTc to a lightweight long dist trail bike is tire size limited. And if I go to the 30mm internal width rim, I'm afraid I might be committed to a large enough tire that rubbing will become an issue.

    DAMNED 1st world problems!

    BTW, anyone know if a set of Fox 32 650b lowers will bolt right onto a 26 set of uppers w/o internal changes? It looks like they just extended the dropouts...?
    Naysayers never apologize. Critics go to their grave thinking everyone else is wrong.
    ╭∩╮( º.º )╭∩╮

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mestapho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,317
    Quote Originally Posted by Pau11y View Post
    I'm still tossing around these vs their 23mm internal width ones in my head...

    Weight isn't too much of an issue at 400g for these, but the tire size commitment is. I'm running Minion DHF/DHR2, 2.52.3 on my 29er version of the LB "Wider" (23mm) rim and getting fantastic results on a Tallboy LTc. But this 650b conversion project of my Blur LTc to a lightweight long dist trail bike is tire size limited. And if I go to the 30mm internal width rim, I'm afraid I might be committed to a large enough tire that rubbing will become an issue.

    DAMNED 1st world problems!

    BTW, anyone know if a set of Fox 32 650b lowers will bolt right onto a 26 set of uppers w/o internal changes? It looks like they just extended the dropouts...?
    That's the beauty of wide rims. A narrower tire becomes a high volume tire. You can run a 2.25 like a 2.4. You get large volume without the weight penalty.

    I'd be very interested on the 650b 32 lower question as well.

  26. #26
    LyN
    LyN is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    38

    Re: PSA: LB 650b X-Wide rim

    Quote Originally Posted by Pau11y View Post
    Weight isn't too much of an issue at 400g for these, but the tire size commitment is. I'm running Minion DHF/DHR2, 2.52.3 on my 29er version of the LB "Wider" (23mm) rim and getting fantastic results on a Tallboy LTc. But this 650b conversion project of my Blur LTc to a lightweight long dist trail bike is tire size limited. And if I go to the 30mm internal width rim, I'm afraid I might be committed to a large enough tire that rubbing will become an issue.
    Have you considered using a wider rim at the front and a narrower rim at the rear? It seems quite sensible to me!

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pau11y's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    7,109
    Quote Originally Posted by mestapho View Post
    That's the beauty of wide rims. A narrower tire becomes a high volume tire. You can run a 2.25 like a 2.4. You get large volume without the weight penalty.

    I'd be very interested on the 650b 32 lower question as well.
    I'll update once I get it and attempt to put A to B...

    As for the wider vs x-wide, the LB ones are bead hook-less. I'm thinking running too narrow of a tire might be an issue, no?
    Naysayers never apologize. Critics go to their grave thinking everyone else is wrong.
    ╭∩╮( º.º )╭∩╮

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: doismellbacon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,332
    My initial experience with the Derby 40mm rim and Mavic 2.2 tires indicates that the wider rim buys you a lot of volume without significantly affecting the tire dimensions in the tread area.... measuring these with calipers on a standard Flow rim and a Derby w/ 34mm internal width, the width of the casing grew from 54 to 58mm, making for much more volume and lower pressures, but the tire grew by only .5mm at the centerline and the widest point of the shoulder knobs. Both tires were brand new, installed at the same time, and inflated to 30 psi, so it was pretty controlled. The growth in the tread area may be greater on tires that are fatter to begin with...I've seem to recall seeing some posts about HD 2.35's swelling a little more than this on the Derby rims... but I also seem to recall them being pretty vague and not offering up any measurements, so maybe a little more research is warranted. On a conversion bike you're not likely to be running extra large tires.

    Unless you're absolutely committed to one specific tire that is already very close to rubbing, I think you'd be better off with a wider rim so you can gain the benefits of the extra volume without changing your clearances much.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation: kingdom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    75
    Just ordered a pair of these to the UK.
    13 day lead time + 4~7 days postage.

    I'll build them up with some new Hope proII hubs (40t) and brass nipples.
    Undecided on spokes- any recommendations?

    I'll post up some photos once they're here.

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pau11y's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    7,109
    Quote Originally Posted by kingdom View Post
    Just ordered a pair of these to the UK.
    13 day lead time + 4~7 days postage.

    I'll build them up with some new Hope proII hubs (40t) and brass nipples.
    Undecided on spokes- any recommendations?

    I'll post up some photos once they're here.
    32 holes? Depends on how you're planning to ride the bike these wheels are going on.

    When I build road wheel, I mix/match spokes and crossings. Front = pretty light (DT Aerolites) at 1x, rear drive side = straight gauge 3x, and non-drive side I use those Aerolites again w/ 1x (or maybe it was 2x...what ever it is to keep the same length as front...Aerolites are really expensive!).

    But if you're going to huck these wheels, maybe some DT Comp db at 3x w/ brass. It won't be the lightest, but it'll be plenty strong for just about anything you can throw at those rims. If you want to mix/match, maybe straight gauge on the disc side front, and drive side back w/ brass...and some DT Revos on the non-drive front, and disc side on back w/ (ano'd) alloy...all 3x. But, mixing/matching can get expensive!
    Naysayers never apologize. Critics go to their grave thinking everyone else is wrong.
    ╭∩╮( º.º )╭∩╮

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mestapho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,317

    PSA: LB 650b X-Wide rim

    Quote Originally Posted by Pau11y View Post
    I'll update once I get it and attempt to put A to B...

    As for the wider vs x-wide, the LB ones are bead hook-less. I'm thinking running too narrow of a tire might be an issue, no?
    That's one weakness I see with the LB hookless design - the lack of a bead capturing shoulder. On Derby rims it REALLY locks the bead against the rim wall making it very unlikely to burp. However, I don't think the width of the tire you choose is going to effect that one way or the other.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pau11y's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    7,109
    Quote Originally Posted by mestapho View Post
    That's one weakness I see with the LB hookless design - the lack of a bead capturing shoulder. On Derby rims it REALLY locks the bead against the rim wall making it very unlikely to burp. However, I don't think the width of the tire you choose is going to effect that one way or the other.
    Mestapho,
    I called Fox on swapping the lowers of a 26 to 27.5, and they're worried about the rake/offset of the 26er's old CSU. I wasn't able to find any info on Fox's fork offsets, so I used Rockshox to glean a baseline. I hopped on QBP and checked both Pike and Revelation and found a consistency of 2mm difference between the 26 and 27.5, 26 = 40mm and 27.5 = 42, regardless of travel. And, the 29ers have either 51 or 46mm rake. So, I'm gonna say the 2mm will be irrelevant in the big picture when you consider a 29er can have 6mm of rake variance.

    A 27.5 w/ a 26's 40mm rake might make the bike a touch sluggish since less rake = more trail. But then, I'm on a 29er w/ 46mm rake vs the standard issue 51, so I don't think I'll notice the slowness, especially since I'll be steering the bike w/ a 750mm bar.

    The only thing I'd still need to check is physical clearance at full travel/compression...make sure no part of the arch will collide w/ the crown when the thing is fully compressed. Will update again when I can stick a set of uppers into these lowers that have yet to get to me.

    Edit: Dave at Fox made NO mention that the internals need updating, so fingers crossed there. But, he's escalating the question to engineering to see if there will be any issues, and is supposed to call me back.
    Naysayers never apologize. Critics go to their grave thinking everyone else is wrong.
    ╭∩╮( º.º )╭∩╮

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mestapho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    2,317

    PSA: LB 650b X-Wide rim

    Quote Originally Posted by Pau11y View Post
    Mestapho,
    I called Fox on swapping the lowers of a 26 to 27.5, and they're worried about the rake/offset of the 26er's old CSU. I wasn't able to find any info on Fox's fork offsets, so I used Rockshox to glean a baseline. I hopped on QBP and checked both Pike and Revelation and found a consistency of 2mm difference between the 26 and 27.5, 26 = 40mm and 27.5 = 42, regardless of travel. And, the 29ers have either 51 or 46mm rake. So, I'm gonna say the 2mm will be irrelevant in the big picture when you consider a 29er can have 6mm of rake variance.

    A 27.5 w/ a 26's 40mm rake might make the bike a touch sluggish since less rake = more trail. But then, I'm on a 29er w/ 46mm rake vs the standard issue 51, so I don't think I'll notice the slowness, especially since I'll be steering the bike w/ a 750mm bar.

    The only thing I'd still need to check is physical clearance at full travel/compression...make sure no part of the arch will collide w/ the crown when the thing is fully compressed. Will update again when I can stick a set of uppers into these lowers that have yet to get to me.

    Edit: Dave at Fox made NO mention that the internals need updating, so fingers crossed there. But, he's escalating the question to engineering to see if there will be any issues, and is supposed to call me back.
    Awesome! Thanks for foing the leg work. How is a pair of lowers? You can find some pretty good deals on 2014 Float 34's.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: doismellbacon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,332
    My memory is getting foggy, but I'm pretty sure most of the later 26" Fox forks had 39mm offset. It worked pretty well for me with 650b and a steep-ish head angle for an aggressive trail bike of about 68.5 deg..... start approaching 67 degrees and I think the increased offset is much better....but it really is personal preference... it may jive really well with your 29er calibrated reflexes. For factory 27.5 forks, RS has settled on 42mm, but Fox is running 44mm.

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pau11y's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    7,109
    Quote Originally Posted by doismellbacon View Post
    For factory 27.5 forks, RS has settled on 42mm, but Fox is running 44mm.
    doismellbacon, is this 44 from a pretty solid source? How's about that 39?

    My short-shocked Blur LTc is coming in at 67* w/ 127mm rear and a reduced travel 36/160 down to 140. I may steepen things up a bit by dropping the mod'd 32 Float 150 26er to 27.5 down to 140 and raising the back to 130...

    Say, you wouldn't happen to know the 36's rake off the top of your head would ya? Wouldn't happen to be at about 51 would it?
    Naysayers never apologize. Critics go to their grave thinking everyone else is wrong.
    ╭∩╮( º.º )╭∩╮

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: doismellbacon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,332
    There's a pretty exhaustive list of pre-27.5 forks in this thread, which is supposedly gathered directly from the manufacturers.
    Standard rake/offset for suspension forks?
    I know that it has the correct numbers for every fork on there that I've owned since 2008 (2 x 32mm Fox's, an old Pike w/ 42mm, and a revelation 26 w/ 40mm).
    I've seen official Fox data on the 27.5 forks, but I can't find that thread now so I'm working from memory....I'm kind of a nerd about these things, and it's been pretty thoroughly discussed in the this forum that RS is shortest at 42, Fox is 44, and X-Fusion is 46. So I haven't measured it myself, and I can't lay my hands on the official Fox data....I'm pretty confident it's right, but take it for what it's worth. This is in regards to their 34 / 35 mm stanchion forks, btw. X-fusion's 32mm Velvet is 42, and I haven't really been paying any attention to the shorter travel XC race models.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pau11y's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    7,109
    Quote Originally Posted by doismellbacon View Post
    There's a pretty exhaustive list of pre-27.5 forks in this thread, which is supposedly gathered directly from the manufacturers.
    Standard rake/offset for suspension forks?
    I know that it has the correct numbers for every fork on there that I've owned since 2008 (2 x 32mm Fox's, an old Pike w/ 42mm, and a revelation 26 w/ 40mm).
    I've seen official Fox data on the 27.5 forks, but I can't find that thread now so I'm working from memory....I'm kind of a nerd about these things, and it's been pretty thoroughly discussed in the this forum that RS is shortest at 42, Fox is 44, and X-Fusion is 46. So I haven't measured it myself, and I can't lay my hands on the official Fox data....I'm pretty confident it's right, but take it for what it's worth. This is in regards to their 34 / 35 mm stanchion forks, btw. X-fusion's 32mm Velvet is 42, and I haven't really been paying any attention to the shorter travel XC race models.
    Hey, no worries man. I'll take your word for it. I'm still on the page that 27.5 lowers onto 26 crown offset will be just fine. Honestly, I'm also thinking the difference is in the dropouts, not in the crown...why would you tool your mfg chain to have two crown variations when the offset can be achieved at dropout...just not cost effective. Anyway, thanks for the link. I'll go get my 36 from there
    Naysayers never apologize. Critics go to their grave thinking everyone else is wrong.
    ╭∩╮( º.º )╭∩╮

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation: doismellbacon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,332
    At least some of the offset is achieved at the crown... you can see it.
    Why change the lowers anyway? Fox has the most clearance of any 26" forks. They will take decent sized tires as is. Let me guess.... it's gotta be Hans Dampf 2.35 compatible! Is that it? LOL - I've never seen so many people try to rearrange their entire life around one tire.
    Anyway, sorry for extending the thread-jacking

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9,797
    Quote Originally Posted by doismellbacon View Post
    Let me guess.... it's gotta be Hans Dampf 2.35 compatible! Is that it? LOL - I've never seen so many people try to rearrange their entire life around one tire.
    That's me just with a 2.4" Conti Trail King. Love that tire. Won't buy a bike that can't fit it front and back.

    I only need 1 tire I really love and when I find I stick with it.

    To me letting a frame or fork determine what tire you can use is crazy when there are options that take big rubber.

    But that's just me - live and let live!
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pau11y's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    7,109
    Quote Originally Posted by doismellbacon View Post
    At least some of the offset is achieved at the crown... you can see it.
    Why change the lowers anyway? Fox has the most clearance of any 26" forks. They will take decent sized tires as is. Let me guess.... it's gotta be Hans Dampf 2.35 compatible! Is that it? LOL - I've never seen so many people try to rearrange their entire life around one tire.
    Anyway, sorry for extending the thread-jacking
    That's not the tire I'd choose...more like Conti TK/RQ 2.4, or a Minion DHF 2.5 when they start putting these out in 650b

    I'm running a 2.5 DHF on my 29er and it's an AMAZING tire (just hoping the DHR2 2.3 will fit the rear of the Blur LT when it's released)! BUT, there's less than 1/2" of clearance to the arch of a Pike w/ that 2.5! The new lowers will only cost me $62 to my door...it was a pretty new pull...and I'll need to get some SKF seals. So, all said, the lowers w/ new seals will STILL be less than $100. I think the bushes on my 26 lowers are played out (can feel plenty of slop), so I was looking to send them in to Fox anyway...and may still do so I can go back and forth...but I'll have that reduced 36 I can bolt on too.
    Naysayers never apologize. Critics go to their grave thinking everyone else is wrong.
    ╭∩╮( º.º )╭∩╮

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation: doismellbacon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,332
    yeah, makes sense. Not hating on fat tire lovers, gents! I'm sure nothing crawls up wet rocks like a Trail King 2.4... I love the 2.2 on the back of my 26" HT.
    carry on!

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9,797
    Is the profile of this wide LB 650B rim different than their previous offerings in terms of how it would setup tubeless?
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pau11y's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    7,109
    Quote Originally Posted by doismellbacon View Post
    yeah, makes sense. Not hating on fat tire lovers, gents! I'm sure nothing crawls up wet rocks like a Trail King 2.4... I love the 2.2 on the back of my 26" HT.
    carry on!
    FYI, those new DHR2s do better in the wet!
    Naysayers never apologize. Critics go to their grave thinking everyone else is wrong.
    ╭∩╮( º.º )╭∩╮

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pau11y's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    7,109
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    Is the profile of this wide LB 650B rim different than their previous offerings in terms of how it would setup tubeless?
    "Profile"?? You mean that shelf for the bead seat? I think I see one there.

    There is a thread in the 29er forum where Nextie-Bike is giving away some 35mm wide 29er rims. They also have a 650b one, just like the LB one, but with a bead hook. It's description says it's TLR compat...

    OT: Nextie is making a 80mm wide fat bike rim...this could be interesting!
    Naysayers never apologize. Critics go to their grave thinking everyone else is wrong.
    ╭∩╮( º.º )╭∩╮

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    81
    Hi Guys, really keen to getting hold of the new 650b 35mm wide rim, I have bought CK ISO hubs but cant decide on spokes, was thinking Sapim D-Lights, anyone running them?

  46. #46
    LyN
    LyN is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    38
    I've just ordered one 35mm rim to build a front wheel. I will lace it up with 1422 (or 1420, can't remember now) Pillar spokes and 14mm pillar nipples sold by LB at $1,62 each pair (spoke+nipple) which seems a pretty good deal.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    81
    Hi LyN, did you order brass nipples?

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    81
    FYI - I have modeled up in CAD the 'cross section' drawing that LB sent me, it gives you a feel for the width and strength.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails PSA: LB 650b X-Wide rim-rim1.jpg  


  49. #49
    LyN
    LyN is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    38

    Re: PSA: LB 650b X-Wide rim

    Quote Originally Posted by Muchas View Post
    Hi LyN, did you order brass nipples?
    No, alloy nipples. I've never had a problem with them. Just remember to lubricate them well whenever you have to tension/center the wheel.

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9,797
    I'd love to hear how these rims setup tubeless when you folks start getting your wheels built up.

    I'm going to pull the trigger in Jan/Feb 2014.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    911

    PSA: LB 650b X-Wide rim

    Also like to know how the hookless rim sets up tubeless. Does the bead shelf have little raised edges like the derby rims to retain the bead or is it just flat?

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    148
    Has anyone received these yet?

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brankulo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,421
    ok so what is the advantage of this 35mm rim hookless design vs hooked design other chinese offer? thicker sidewall? looks like .7mm thicker per side.

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pau11y's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    7,109
    Quote Originally Posted by brankulo View Post
    ok so what is the advantage of this 35mm rim hookless design vs hooked design other chinese offer? thicker sidewall? looks like .7mm thicker per side.
    Even tho I posted this, I'm prob gonna go w/ the Nextie-bike bead hook ones.
    Naysayers never apologize. Critics go to their grave thinking everyone else is wrong.
    ╭∩╮( º.º )╭∩╮

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brankulo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,421
    yeah, i am thinking about same rim. still kind of worried seeing all the dents in my rear flow

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation: doismellbacon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,332
    I've got a couple faint white marks in the clear coat of my Derby rims from riding them on the same chundery trails that have folded down the bead on my Flows MANY times...and I'm running about 20-25% lower pressure. I don't know that other carbon rims....some with bead hooks, and all with thinner walls at the bead... would be as bomber as the Derby's, so bear that in mind, but a well constructed carbon rim seems to not even notice the kind of impacts that will flatten the bead on an alu rim.

  57. #57
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pau11y's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    7,109
    I run pretty high pressures on my 29er version of the LB's wider and heavier AM rim...32/35 psi, frt/rr, respectively, and traction hasn't been an issue. I have a set of DT Swiss XRC330s (carbons), and a set of Reynolds MTNc, both 26er, and run them w/ the same pressures, again, no traction issues. So, a little thinner at the bead hook prob won't be an issue at those pressures.
    Naysayers never apologize. Critics go to their grave thinking everyone else is wrong.
    ╭∩╮( º.º )╭∩╮

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9,797
    Thinking of getting the LB wide 650B rims....if I have 2mm nipples and 35mm Stan's presta stems for the build is that going to work or do I need longer items due to the depth of the rim?
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation: joezuri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    117

    LB 35mm 650b rims

    Mine have arrived. Great workmanship and finish. Custom decals black on black graphics on matt UD finish. Rims weight in at 420g each.

    PSA: LB 650b X-Wide rim-20131224_082828.jpgPSA: LB 650b X-Wide rim-20131224_081919.jpg

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ramjm_2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,122
    Looks great. I'm still waiting on mine.

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation: doismellbacon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,332
    Quote Originally Posted by Pau11y View Post
    I run pretty high pressures on my 29er version of the LB's wider and heavier AM rim...32/35 psi, frt/rr, respectively, and traction hasn't been an issue. I have a set of DT Swiss XRC330s (carbons), and a set of Reynolds MTNc, both 26er, and run them w/ the same pressures, again, no traction issues. So, a little thinner at the bead hook prob won't be an issue at those pressures.
    Why on earth would you be running such high pressures on modern, tubeless friendly, wide 29" wheels? You're missing out on all the good stuff!

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    81
    Hi guys,

    What nipple length did you use on the 35mm wide rim with the inner bed 'un drilled' (full UST rim profile). The reason I ask is that LB just got back to me saying I need to use 11mm nipples? if the rim is left un drilled!.

  63. #63
    Trail Ninja
    Reputation: Varaxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    4,650
    I wonder if people will be looking back at this in a few years in time and go, wow, these guys were really behind. I find it cool that they now pay attention to the inner radius (generally unideal to have sharp angles/bends with carbon), but in the end, these carbon rims are still made from T700 prepreg, drilled, and fashioned in the image of alloy rims. Any carbon product manufactured to mimic the shape of well designed alloy equivalent product, the shaped to make best use of the material, is simply not ideal. Also using weaved carbon is generally a cop-out move, typically used by someone trying to mimic metal's isotropic nature with carbon, assuming you can get similar stiffness at a lighter weight by doing so, making it thick to be safe. Reminds me of the guys who take carbon fiber "plates" and machines them into lightweight chain guides and RD cages, machining holes and slots out of them for further weight savings.

    This is considered entry level carbon for a reason. If someone said this was 3/4 of an Enve at 1/4 of the price, I wouldn't argue with them. Enve uses 100% UD and molds their spoke holes (very significant, if you know how carbon fiber gets its strength), and Easton uses higher tech resins which boost impact resistance. Both of them are UST certified as well. Carbon market is shaking up, with the SRAM Roam 60 and Bonty Rhythm Pro probably making it to people's list as well. Nox composites looks like it might be a step up from these and Derby.

  64. #64
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Salespunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    4,921
    Varaxis, interesting comments. A couple of questions for you. First it seems as though the real issue with all of these rims is the sidewall. I have yet to see any issues with the spoke holes even on drilled carbon rims. Do you think that the spoke holes are overbuilt on all these rims and there is an opportunity to lose even more weight? I have experience with the Easton Havens which I think are as tough as you can get for a rim and put aluminum to shame.

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation: doismellbacon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,332
    There were definitely some Light-Bicycles rims showing up here with cracks propagating from the spoke holes.
    Derby, for one, is addressing it with a very thick overbuilt spoke bed, and I imagine others do too. I agree that to truly optimize strength and weight you need continuous fibers, and to my knowledge Enve is the winner in that regard. My thinking in buying the Derby's is that I'll accept a 10-20 gram per rim penalty for the overbuilt spoke bed (and rim bead, for that matter) to get a strong and reliable rim for 1/3 the price of Enve. The definition of optimum changes when price is figured in.
    I think the comments about applying composites to alloy-optimized legacy designs is spot on also. Ric with Mad Fiber made a noble attempt at addressing this on the road side by doing away with any holes and metal spokes altogether...bonding tensioned carbon ribbons (instead of threaded metal spokes) to an undrilled carbon rim....new parts used in new ways, rather than trying to do the same old thing but with a new material that has different strengths and weaknesses.

  66. #66
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    148
    PSA: LB 650b X-Wide rim-img_1707.jpgPSA: LB 650b X-Wide rim-img_1709.jpgPSA: LB 650b X-Wide rim-img_1711.jpg

    Mine arrived today. Well packaged and they look great. Here are some side by side pics with a WTB i23

    my cheap scale has the weights at:
    WTB i23 @ 511g
    LB @ 414g

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation: joezuri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    117
    @sanman have you tried mounting tyres on the rims yet?

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    148
    No, just got them today. I will drop them off tomorrow to be built.

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    148

    PSA: LB 650b X-Wide rim

    Just for the heck of it I mounted a 2.35 Hans Dampf with a tube (no rim tape as the wheel is not built.). It was tight to get on. However with my hands and some massaging to keep the tire in the center channel it I got it on. The beads set at 38psi.

    I used a Crank Brothers speed lever to get the tire off no problem. With no marks to the rim.

    Can't wait to build them up and ride them. I hope they hold up as well as they look.

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9,797
    Quote Originally Posted by Muchas View Post
    Hi guys,

    What nipple length did you use on the 35mm wide rim with the inner bed 'un drilled' (full UST rim profile). The reason I ask is that LB just got back to me saying I need to use 11mm nipples? if the rim is left un drilled!.
    Anything further on this? Did you drill 'em or go with mega long nipples?
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9,797
    I ordered a set of the 35mm wide 650B LB rims. I'm interested to see how they perform and the only way to know is to try them.

    Thanks to the OP for posting the info. 30mm inner width is perfect for the tires I want to run.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  72. #72
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    81
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    Anything further on this? Did you drill 'em or go with mega long nipples?
    I am going to place an order this week, but not going for the full UST rim bed as planned.

    I think it's a massive oversight on LB part for not designing the internal cavity big enough. After chatting to some guys with the AM rim which is 30mm deep had no problems threading the nipples around the rim, LB advised only 11mm nipples would fit the 25mm deep rim and nobody makes them!!.

    Are you ordering Pillar spokes from them?

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    81
    Quote Originally Posted by joezuri View Post
    Mine have arrived. Great workmanship and finish. Custom decals black on black graphics on matt UD finish. Rims weight in at 420g each.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20131224_082828.jpg 
Views:	489 
Size:	86.6 KB 
ID:	859099Click image for larger version. 

Name:	20131224_081919.jpg 
Views:	457 
Size:	184.5 KB 
ID:	859098
    Very nice decals, I can't decide what to have on mine!

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9,797
    Quote Originally Posted by Muchas View Post
    I am going to place an order this week, but not going for the full UST rim bed as planned.

    I think it's a massive oversight on LB part for not designing the internal cavity big enough. After chatting to some guys with the AM rim which is 30mm deep had no problems threading the nipples around the rim, LB advised only 11mm nipples would fit the 25mm deep rim and nobody makes them!!.

    Are you ordering Pillar spokes from them?


    I was just ordering rims. I didn't see any option for UST or other rim beds??

    Here are some 12mm DT Swiss nipples:

    DT Swiss 12mm Nipples > Components > Wheel Goods > Spokes & Nipples | Jenson USA Online Bike Shop

    I was going to order spokes/nipples separately.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation: brankulo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,421
    Quote Originally Posted by Muchas View Post
    I am going to place an order this week, but not going for the full UST rim bed as planned.

    I think it's a massive oversight on LB part for not designing the internal cavity big enough. After chatting to some guys with the AM rim which is 30mm deep had no problems threading the nipples around the rim, LB advised only 11mm nipples would fit the 25mm deep rim and nobody makes them!!.

    Are you ordering Pillar spokes from them?
    not quite sure what you guys discussing here? why would standard nipple not fit? i dont see any problems fitting nipples from the pictures i have seen.

  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9,797
    Quote Originally Posted by brankulo View Post
    not quite sure what you guys discussing here? why would standard nipple not fit? i dont see any problems fitting nipples from the pictures i have seen.
    +1 - I'm not sure either.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ramjm_2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,122
    Didn't even know a UST bed was an option...wouldn't want it anyway.

  78. #78
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    81
    Quote Originally Posted by brankulo View Post
    not quite sure what you guys discussing here? why would standard nipple not fit? i dont see any problems fitting nipples from the pictures i have seen.

    Ok sorry I wasn't clear, I'll explain a bit further, I have been in contact with LB with regards spoke hole options etc and asked for the inner bead bed to be left un drilled making the rim full UST, which is what I wanted. I have this on my current Fulcrum wheels and its great, no faffing with tape etc. So, it pans out that yes they would sell me a rim of this configuration but the internal aperture will not except a standard 12mm nipple (vertically when installing). This method is fine for the 26er AM rim as it is 5mm deeper.

    Below is shot of the rim I modelled up to simulate if it was possible to install the nipples etc.......

    http://fcdn.mtbr.com/attachments/whe...im-nipples.jpg

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ramjm_2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,122
    Wow that's pretty cool they are willing to even consider it as an option. Hopefully the performance will live up to the expectation. Patiently waiting...

  80. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation: doismellbacon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,332
    Quote Originally Posted by Muchas View Post
    Ok sorry I wasn't clear, I'll explain a bit further, I have been in contact with LB with regards spoke hole options etc and asked for the inner bead bed to be left un drilled making the rim full UST, which is what I wanted. I have this on my current Fulcrum wheels and its great, no faffing with tape etc. So, it pans out that yes they would sell me a rim of this configuration but the internal aperture will not except a standard 12mm nipple (vertically when installing). This method is fine for the 26er AM rim as it is 5mm deeper.

    Below is shot of the rim I modelled up to simulate if it was possible to install the nipples etc.......

    http://fcdn.mtbr.com/attachments/whe...im-nipples.jpg
    How would you get the nipples installed for lacing?.... Thread a clipped off spoke into the nipple then use a magnet to get it around the rim and through the hole? I've heard this method is used in some "system" wheels....always sounded like one of those things that might not work as well as hoped in a DIY situation, but I could be totally wrong. If lacing becomes 10x more of a headache than installing tape, is it worth the hassle? I guess it would make for a slightly stiffer rim...maybe... but also a litte heavier too.

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9,797
    Quote Originally Posted by doismellbacon View Post
    If lacing becomes 10x more of a headache than installing tape, is it worth the hassle? I guess it would make for a slightly stiffer rim...maybe... but also a litte heavier too.
    +1 - on the hassle of applying tape [20 seconds per wheel once in its life] vs. dealing with fishing the nipples through the rim.

    32 spoke holes are not going to change the stiffness of the rim - assuming that's the only difference between them.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation: doismellbacon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,332
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    32 spoke holes are not going to change the stiffness of the rim - assuming that's the only difference between them.
    Yeah, I agree, probably wouldn't make any measurable difference.

  83. #83
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pau11y's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    7,109
    Quote Originally Posted by doismellbacon View Post
    How would you get the nipples installed for lacing?....
    Derailleur cable, maybe? But MAN what a PITA that would be!

    I can see some razor scars on my wrist after that exercise! I'll just do the Trek Rhythm rim strips and suffer the extra gram or 10, thanks!
    Naysayers never apologize. Critics go to their grave thinking everyone else is wrong.
    ╭∩╮( º.º )╭∩╮

  84. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation: doismellbacon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,332
    I think it was Campy/Fulcrum that I was reading about using the magnet in the nipple method.... their big-ass nipples / hole / magnet would probably make it much easier

  85. #85
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Ramjm_2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,122
    Speaking of tape, whats everyone using? 25mm seems to be the widest out there? Folks getting good results with 32mm+ bed widths?

  86. #86
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9,797
    Quote Originally Posted by Ramjm_2000 View Post
    Speaking of tape, whats everyone using? 25mm seems to be the widest out there? Folks getting good results with 32mm+ bed widths?


    Inner width is 30mm on the LB wide 650B rims. I used Stan's 25mm tape + rubber rim strip to get my Blunt 35s to setup tubeless.

    I'm hoping to just use tape on the LB 35mm rims.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  87. #87
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    114
    Quote Originally Posted by Ramjm_2000 View Post
    Speaking of tape, whats everyone using? 25mm seems to be the widest out there? Folks getting good results with 32mm+ bed widths?
    I went with the Gorilla tape method and Stan's sealant and it worked great. Cut the tape to 35mm, and applied 2 layers.

  88. #88
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    81
    Quote Originally Posted by Carrera911xc View Post
    I went with the Gorilla tape method and Stan's sealant and it worked great. Cut the tape to 35mm, and applied 2 layers.
    excellent, I saw on Pink bike they cut down Gorilla tape to the outside width of the rim, glad to hear it works. I'll be doing the same when they arrive..;-)

  89. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    81
    Hey, for all you lucky people that already have your rims can I ask what spoke pattern did you choose 2x or 3x...?

    The reason i ask is that Enve use 2x which puts less stress into the rim spoke hole...

  90. #90
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pau11y's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    7,109
    Quote Originally Posted by Muchas View Post
    The reason i ask is that Enve use 2x which puts less stress into the rim spoke hole...
    It does? You mean side loading?
    Naysayers never apologize. Critics go to their grave thinking everyone else is wrong.
    ╭∩╮( º.º )╭∩╮

  91. #91
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    81
    Quote Originally Posted by Pau11y View Post
    It does? You mean side loading?
    2x gives a better perpendicular spoke to rim interface.

  92. #92
    Nouveau Retrogrouch SuperModerator
    Reputation: shiggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1998
    Posts
    48,307

    PSA: LB 650b X-Wide rim

    Quote Originally Posted by Muchas View Post
    Hey, for all you lucky people that already have your rims can I ask what spoke pattern did you choose 2x or 3x...?

    The reason i ask is that Enve use 2x which puts less stress into the rim spoke hole...
    Because of the alignment of Enve's molded nipple cups. Not usually an issue with drilled spoke holes.
    In a 28 or 32 spoke wheel 3X makes a more torsionally stable wheel.
    mtbtires.com
    The trouble with common sense is it is no longer common

  93. #93
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pau11y's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    7,109
    Quote Originally Posted by Muchas View Post
    2x gives a better perpendicular spoke to rim interface.
    By that metric, then radially laced wheel should be the strongest...at least for nipple/rim interface. However, it's generally recognized in wheel building that when you increase the number of crossing, you also increase wheel strength...see BMX wheels w/ 4x.
    My point, your metric is bogus. BTW, J-bend spokes typically break at the hub flange, and nipples exits rims pretty much perpendicular to the tangent of the rim at that exit point. The spoke is what is bending just beyond the nipple. Yes, there is a side load at the rim, bit it's insignificant and irrelevant.
    Naysayers never apologize. Critics go to their grave thinking everyone else is wrong.
    ╭∩╮( º.º )╭∩╮

  94. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    148

    PSA: LB 650b X-Wide rim

    I went with gorilla tape edge to edge. Used a 2.35 Hans Dampf front and 2.35 Nobby Nic that I had mounted on a different set of wheels. They mounted up super easy with no leaks.

  95. #95
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    81
    Quote Originally Posted by Pau11y View Post
    By that metric, then radially laced wheel should be the strongest...at least for nipple/rim interface. However, it's generally recognized in wheel building that when you increase the number of crossing, you also increase wheel strength...see BMX wheels w/ 4x.
    My point, your metric is bogus. BTW, J-bend spokes typically break at the hub flange, and nipples exits rims pretty much perpendicular to the tangent of the rim at that exit point. The spoke is what is bending just beyond the nipple. Yes, there is a side load at the rim, bit it's insignificant and irrelevant.
    I'm not talking about wheel strength in general or failed spokes here, but point failure at the rim, spoke hole, we see evidence of this happening with spoke pull through in forums etc. Spoke bending is a resultant from the captive nipple trying to stay parallel to the spoke in tension. With a less than perpendicular interface the 'free fit' nipple head will load up on one side exerting a point contact load rather than the optimum full nipple head contact spreading load equally around the full diameter of the hole, thus increasing the micro 'volcano' effect leading to premature failure and nipple pull out. This scenario is more vulnerable due to the carbon lay up being drilled.....ie, all flaps and fairing assemblies on aircraft today are drilled composite panels, the stress calcs are 'worst case' point contact for failure as a margin, but if the design interface is already at point contact the design is compromised and closer to the failure range that the engineer has design for. Check out the LB 'rim to spoke' tension test photo......just saying..;-)

    Its no biggy, sure 3x and 2x are fine as both exist out there in real world conditions, was just curious how like minded people had laced their rims, verses what a couple of pro wheel builders had advised with a comparison with what is emerging from the mainstream manufactures.

  96. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,687
    Are you using 28 spokes or 32? If you are using 28, 2x becomes more of an option. For 32, I would stick with 3x. People seem to forget that the number of spokes is a major factor in how many crosses the wheel can have. BMX wheels tend to be 36 or even 48 spoke wheels, so 4x is a option there.

  97. #97
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9,797
    Quote Originally Posted by Muchas View Post
    I'm not talking about wheel strength in general or failed spokes here, but point failure at the rim, spoke hole, we see evidence of this happening with spoke pull through in forums etc.
    +1 - Moulding in spoke holes definitely makes for a stronger rim when it comes to the tension from the spoke [the overall structure on the rim won't be affected either way as you note].

    I can only assume LB drilled and tested rims to destruction to determine they are sufficiently strong for this application.

    If they weren't strong enough it wouldn't be hard nor expensive to bond in a reinforcement at each spoke hole so the tension was distributed over a wider area than the spoke itself.

    That wouldn't be as elegant a solution, but it would be much faster/cheaper.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  98. #98
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pau11y's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    7,109
    Quote Originally Posted by Muchas View Post
    Check out the LB 'rim to spoke' tension test photo......just saying..;-)
    I know exactly what you're saying, but I'll still put it to you that it's insignificant and irrelevant. LB took one spoke up to...what...like 240 kgf before it (micro volcano) failed? When a wheel is fully built, you'll have your ~100 kgf of tension on the system, and then what your mass is capable of generating...but distributed across 32 spokes...not evenly, but still a distribution. I'm telling ya, it's insignificant and irrelevant...unless there is a weak spot/flaw in the rim. But this also holds true for eyelet'd aluminum rims.
    Naysayers never apologize. Critics go to their grave thinking everyone else is wrong.
    ╭∩╮( º.º )╭∩╮

  99. #99
    mtbr member
    Reputation: vikb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    9,797
    Quote Originally Posted by Pau11y View Post
    I know exactly what you're saying, but I'll still put it to you that it's insignificant and irrelevant. LB took one spoke up to...what...like 240 kgf before it (micro volcano) failed? When a wheel is fully built, you'll have your ~100 kgf of tension on the system, and then what your mass is capable of generating...but distributed across 32 spokes...not evenly, but still a distribution. I'm telling ya, it's insignificant and irrelevant...unless there is a weak spot/flaw in the rim. But this also holds true for eyelet'd aluminum rims.
    A bike wheel is tensioned to its max unloaded. When you ride you are un-loading the tension on the spokes not increasing it.
    Safe riding,

    Vik
    www.vikapproved.com

  100. #100
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pau11y's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    7,109
    Quote Originally Posted by vikb View Post
    A bike wheel is tensioned to its max unloaded. When you ride you are un-loading the tension on the spokes not increasing it.
    Unpossible!
    You're adding mass (you, the rider) to the spoke/rim/hub system at the axle of the hub. Tension HAS to increase. It may not be everywhere on the rim as you say..ex) bottom of the rim...and depending on if you're pedaling or coasting.
    Naysayers never apologize. Critics go to their grave thinking everyone else is wrong.
    ╭∩╮( º.º )╭∩╮

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Yoeleo 30mm wide 650b wheels???
    By joe77bike in forum 27.5
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-09-2014, 02:23 PM
  2. Rock Shox 650b Revelation & wide tires
    By OldManBike in forum 27.5
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 07-12-2013, 07:11 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-06-2013, 09:57 PM
  4. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 12-03-2012, 08:26 AM
  5. wide 650b rims
    By dRjOn in forum 27.5
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12-13-2011, 09:06 AM

Members who have read this thread: 6

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •