Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 30
  1. #1
    rr
    rr is offline
    I don't do PC
    Reputation: rr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    7,415

    Wheels for RFX owners?

    Hey homers, do any of the RFX owners out there have weights for their wheelsets?

    I'm in the process of getting a new wheelset built and trying to get an idea of what will be durable yet still shave some weight off my Sun Ringle wheels. I stripped the wheels and weighed them with rim tape and the rear QR, they came in at 5.64lbs or around 2560g. I'm hoping to shave a pound off this weight yet still have a durable "trail" wheelset, I plan on using the SR's for heavier duty days and the new wheels for standard trail days but they still need to hold up to some abuse. Larry will steer me in the right direction I know, but I'm just curious for comparison sake what kind of wheels you guys are running, my RFX is on the heavy side at 37.3 lbs. Thanks and pics are welcome
    Last edited by rr; 11-24-2006 at 04:19 PM.

  2. #2
    KgB
    KgB is offline
    SNGLSPD
    Reputation: KgB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    934

    dt enduro

    DT SWISS 5.1 rims with their 340 hubs.
    I think it is the best wheelset for the RFX considering weight durability, price and DT's great warranty.
    I've been inside too long.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: drumstix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,152
    2560g are heavy wheels. I-9 enduro set weighs about 1850 grams, the new DT enduro with the 240 hub weighs 1780 I think. I had a set of King hubs with 823 rims that weighed 2300 grams, King hubs laced to 219 Mavics (550g) that weighed 2000 grams.

    If your on a budget, I would go Hope hubs and DT 5.1 rims, should be around 1800g-1900g guessing but Hopes are lightweight and dont cost as much as DT's, Kings or Hadleys.

  4. #4
    rr
    rr is offline
    I don't do PC
    Reputation: rr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    7,415
    Thanks guys, the 5.1 rim is definitely a top consideration, maybe a little on the light side but I'm sure it would hold up to 80% of the riding I do on the RFX, looking at the Hadleys right now for the hubset.

    drumstix- what is the diff bewtween the 823 and 321 Mavic rims, the 823 is the tubeless version correct?

  5. #5
    Leash Law Enforcer
    Reputation: Pinch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,099
    I'm running the DT 5.1s and Hadley hubs. I don't know what the weight is on them but they don't seem overly heavy. I don't have anything to really compare them to but they also seem to be fairly strong. I haven't had any problems with them.
    "I didn't even use crutches when I broke my leg!" - Aquaholic

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: drumstix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,152
    Quote Originally Posted by rroeder
    Thanks guys, the 5.1 rim is definitely a top consideration, maybe a little on the light side but I'm sure it would hold up to 80% of the riding I do on the RFX, looking at the Hadleys right now for the hubset.

    drumstix- what is the diff bewtween the 823 and 321 Mavic rims, the 823 is the tubeless version correct?

    Yeah the 823 is the tubeless rim, its a heavy rim plus you need the nipple adapters that add around 50g per wheel.

    I dont remember exactly what the 321 was, I think you are correct though. the 5.1 can take a beating, its stronger than its heavier 6.1 big brother which is a soft alloy rim that dents real easy. Just guessing here but the 5.1/Hadley combo should get you a 2000 (maybe alittle less) gram wheelset based on my old King/219 set. Over a full pound lighter than the current set you have now.

  7. #7
    Wicketed
    Reputation: swan lee's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    440
    5.1s on hopes for me. they don't really feel that much heavier (when riding) then the xc-ish wheels on my hardtail. but knowing that they can take a beating is confidence inspiring. of course it's the tyres and tubes that make the biggest difference- i swap between 2.5 big earls with DH tubes, and nobby nic 2.25s with just a DH tube in the back, normal tube at front. the latter set-up lights the bike up (in more ways than one) for the general riding...
    'I've got a bike, you can ride it if you like. It's got a basket, a bell that rings, and things to make it look good' - Syd B

  8. #8
    deez nuts
    Reputation: shaft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    206

    Negative reviews on DT 5.1

    I too am trying to find the perfect wheelset for my new RFX. After looking at all of the negative reviews (on MTBR) on the 5.1's they were OFF my list. It seems like you guys are doing fine with them though??

    Did someone say stronger alloy on the 5.1's for 2007?

    King, I9's or DT/Hugi hubs seem to be the hub of choice for 5.1 or Mavic hoops..

    Complete wheelsets that look somewhat promising:

    -DT 1750....not sure what hoops...5.1's? (1750-1800 grams pretty wide)

    -Mavic Crossmax SX (1850-1900 grams and pretty wide) Supposedly they identified the issues with Mavic hubs and it was soft pawls that were disintegrating into the lubricant of the freehub. New hubs this year is what they say. Their hubs were/ are aweful.

    Both of these are in the $700-800 retail range I think.

    I really want a solid UST set up that doesn't leak. Anyone know about DT's set up...is it solid?

    Shaft

  9. #9
    Bodhisattva
    Reputation: The Squeaky Wheel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    9,584
    I had DT 5.1s laced to my Kings a year ago.
    Front is as good as new.
    Rear was recently replaced due to flat spots with another 5.1.

    I subject my wheels to good amount of abuse and don't consider a rebuild after one year unreasonable. If you prefer that they last longer than maybe look at something else.

    Somone (Krispy?) recently posted that DT is aware of this issue and is changing to a stronger alloy in the future. I don't know anything about that.
    Life....the original terminal illness

  10. #10
    aka...appBLING72
    Reputation: aappling72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    918
    Quote Originally Posted by drumstix
    Yeah the 823 is the tubeless rim, its a heavy rim plus you need the nipple adapters that add around 50g per wheel.

    I dont remember exactly what the 321 was, I think you are correct though. the 5.1 can take a beating, its stronger than its heavier 6.1 big brother which is a soft alloy rim that dents real easy. Just guessing here but the 5.1/Hadley combo should get you a 2000 (maybe alittle less) gram wheelset based on my old King/219 set. Over a full pound lighter than the current set you have now.
    Hey the new 07 6.1's are made of a stronger and harder alloy, so they won't dent. Actually they made the 06 softer on purpose to keep from snapping and to allow it to give. That was their thoughts on it though. But I agree the 5.1's are great. I am running them and the 07 6.1's on I-9 hubs. Great wheelsets. Both of them!

  11. #11
    FM
    FM is offline
    luxatio erecta
    Reputation: FM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    8,943
    I'd vote mavic XM823's. I've been using them for a long time, and they withstand all the hack riding I've dished out for them- 7-10 days each at whistler and on the shore last year, plus all the local stuff. Laced up with King hubs, brass nipples and 14/15's they are fairly light for being essentially maintenance free.

    When I built up my highline, I traded rear wheels with E < I > O to get his 150mm rear hub. It was laced to a DT FR5.1 which he had severley flat spotted on it's first ride. Granted he's a big guy and was going big at whistler..... thing is, I figured it wasn't that bad and I could bend it back with a vise/crescent wrench- the rim was putty. I was horrified at how easily the material deformed. I've done the same job on mavic rims and whatever their alloy is, it's much stronger. Not to mention, it's pinned and welded, and has half as many holes drilled in it so it can be UST without a special strip. Less holes = stronger rim. I am typically getting 2 seasons out of rear ex823's and haven't needed to replace a front yet.

    Also of note- presuming you use the same nipples, DT FR5.1's and Mavic XM823's have the same ERD. I was able to do a lace-over using EIO's old spokes, I only needed to replace the rim and nipples.

  12. #12
    rr
    rr is offline
    I don't do PC
    Reputation: rr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    7,415
    Great info, the 823's might make the wheelset too close in weight to my current wheels, I'm looking to shave a little weight with these, the SR's will be used for lift assisted riding and our shuttle rides, plus I don't think UST is needed with the beefier tires for our terrain, I definitely prefer UST with my XC bike and 2.1ish tires, love the setup.

    Would a 36 spoke rear wheel make a diff? I could go DT5.1 and run a 32 up front with a 36 in the rear, shouldn't add much weight.

  13. #13
    FM
    FM is offline
    luxatio erecta
    Reputation: FM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    8,943
    Quote Originally Posted by rroeder
    Great info, the 823's might make the wheelset too close in weight to my current wheels, I'm looking to shave a little weight with these, the SR's will be used for lift assisted riding and our shuttle rides, plus I don't think UST is needed with the beefier tires for our terrain, I definitely prefer UST with my XC bike and 2.1ish tires, love the setup.

    Would a 36 spoke rear wheel make a diff? I could go DT5.1 and run a 32 up front with a 36 in the rear, shouldn't add much weight.
    Why not try the opposite approach- go with the 823's in 32 hole and use lighter 15/16g spokes? Food for thought....

    Logic being, more spokes will make a wheel heavier and stiffer but not make the actual rim stronger. You can have 48 spokes and still flat spot if you case a rock with low PSI. A burly rim with less/lighter spokes will be more resisant to flat spotting, but might need more frequent truing and won't like sideways landings etc. better compimise for AM/XC riding imho.

  14. #14
    Alaska Turner Mafia
    Reputation: EndoRando's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    1,098
    Quote Originally Posted by rroeder
    Hey homers, do any of the RFX owners out there have weights for their wheelsets?

    I stripped the wheels and weighed them with rim tape and the rear QR, they came in at 5.64lbs or around 2560g. I'm hoping to shave a pound off this weight yet still have a durable "trail" wheelset,
    rr, I've been banging my 6 Pack over a ton of serious roots with 5.1 rims, and so far so good. Front is laced to a Ringle 32H 20mm hub, rear laced to a 36H Hope Bulb. Both have 14/15 DB spokes and brass nips. The pair together with rim strips weighed in at 2061g, which is more than a pound less than yours. I'd say shaving a pound off your set is easily attainable, especially since there are lighter hubs out there than I'm using.

    Rando
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Deceleration Trauma is my middle name

  15. #15
    rr
    rr is offline
    I don't do PC
    Reputation: rr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    7,415
    Damn Rando, thats some gnarly roots! I like the idea of a 36 rear.

    FM- thanks for the input, at 200lbs I'm kinda hesitant to use lightweight spokes but I'm open to the idea, how much weight diff is there between the 14/15 gauge spokes and 15/16? Probably let Larry make that call

  16. #16
    Neg reppers r my biatches
    Reputation: FoShizzle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    17,260
    in talking with Squeaky at great length, we have concluded that the right wheelset for a lighter weight 6" travel bike would be the Am Classics with some sweet 1.9 rubbers....you would be much faster

  17. #17
    Lay off the Levers
    Reputation: Bikezilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    10,135
    I'm running the EX823 rims laced to CK hubs. Unbeliveably strong. Also suprisingly heavy compared to my XMXLs. My rear is a 36H and has taken a hellatious beating. I also would like to go lighter...but with all the rocks and stuff, it's hard to give up the strength.
    Faster is better, even when it's not.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    4,345
    Quote Originally Posted by FoShizzle
    in talking with Squeaky at great length, we have concluded that the right wheelset for a lighter weight 6" travel bike would be the Am Classics with some sweet 1.9 rubbers....you would be much faster
    Exactly. NOTHING beats that 350 gram rim.

    Well, except maybe a rock or a root.

    (To be fair, they seem great wheels for their intended purpose. My 115 lb wife says hers are rockets, and she hasn't hurt them in almost two full seasons.)
    The drive towards achievement and success is the motive power of civilization.

  19. #19
    not so super...
    Reputation: SSINGA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    11,459
    My I9's with the DT5.1 were 1865g with the rim tape. No issues with the rims after months of hard use.
    Nothing to see here.

  20. #20
    Natl. Champ DH Poser/Hack
    Reputation: cactuscorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    12,971
    suddup allready! im workin on it! sheesh!
    No, I'm NOT back!

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CrashTheDOG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    2,382
    Quote Originally Posted by FM
    I'd vote mavic XM823's.
    Can you run a standard tub and tire on the 823's? I keep hearing great things about this rim, but having never used tubeless I'm hesitant to lace up a set of wheels that won't allow me to run a standard tire and tube. Would it be better to just go with the Mavic 729's?

  22. #22
    FM
    FM is offline
    luxatio erecta
    Reputation: FM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    8,943
    Quote Originally Posted by CrashTheDOG
    Can you run a standard tub and tire on the 823's? I keep hearing great things about this rim, but having never used tubeless I'm hesitant to lace up a set of wheels that won't allow me to run a standard tire and tube. Would it be better to just go with the Mavic 729's?
    yeah you can totally run standard tires and tubes, the only thing is you may want to run long stem tubes or else you don't get much valve stem to work with as the rims are failry deep profile. Hows that for a run-on sentence!

    I have a few clyde freinds who prefer the 823's for XC use, they are really not that heavy...

    RRoeder, I am not sure about the weight difference with the spokes- I would just go 14/15g personally, get lighter tires if you want to save weight...

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jncarpenter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    6,758
    ...I'm running I9 wheels built up with Mavic 823's. 20mm front & 10mm "TA" rear that weigh in @ 2020 gms. I wouldn't trade them for a lighter set I am currently running them tubeless w/ Maxxis High Roller 2.35 LUST tires...absolutely flawless thus far. Easily handles 4-5' drops several times a week @ 28psi w/ no burping what-so-ever. Good combo.


  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: drumstix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    2,152
    Quote Originally Posted by jncarpenter
    ...I'm running I9 wheels built up with Mavic 823's. 20mm front & 10mm "TA" rear that weigh in @ 2020 gms. I wouldn't trade them for a lighter set I am currently running them tubeless w/ Maxxis High Roller 2.35 LUST tires...absolutely flawless thus far. Easily handles 4-5' drops several times a week @ 28psi w/ no burping what-so-ever. Good combo.

    Man that sounds like a great set up! Hard to believe that the I9 hub/spokes weigh about 240 grams lighter than the King-823 set I had. Im pretty sure it weighed about 2280g. I dont know if 823's very from year to year. I had the second year of the first design, it out side had the rib on the rim.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    2,029
    The DT 5.1 and Mavic 823 are quite different in weight (and intended use). The several 5.1s that I have weighed were all 500g on the dot. The Mavic 823 is right around 700g with the required 'FORE' inserts..that makes it the heaviest Mavic rim IIRC. The 823 is really a DH rim. You definately need to define you wheel use to compare 'like' rims. If you are willing to use 700g rims, that opens up a LOT of other options. Just need to decide what kind of wheels are needed.
    In my 25+ years of riding, wrenching on, and building bikes, I have noticed NO functional diference between 32 and 36 spokes. There are patterns that cannot be done on 32 holes, but they are for cosmetic purposes only. I have run spokes as thin as revolutions (1.5mm) on DH rims(all but drive side). They heald up OK, but definately had more flex that heavier spokes. DT 14/15s are THE standard. I would not go thinner than 14/15 on the drive side on my bikes by experience (ask your builder about using thicker drive spokes due to tension issues )..lots and lots of decisions...Spoke weights are on the DTswiss site...

    For the poster that asked about the Mavics..
    their numbering system is quite straing forward once you figure it out. The first # is the 'quality' (features and $$) of the rim. The higher the number, the 'better' the rim. Odd #s are standard rims, even #s (only 8 currently) are tubeless. The second and third numbers are the inner rim width in millimeters.

    Oh yea... I am 190#, run either Mavic 729 or 721 on the DHR (hadleys and alpine IIIs) and just build some 5.1s on my older hadleys with14/15s for the 5 pack...those roots above look like home to me...
    Last edited by davep; 11-25-2006 at 12:09 AM.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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