Results 1 to 23 of 23
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    207

    Marwi Ti or CX Ray Spokes?

    I've read that the Marwi's will save almost an ounce over the CX rays, albeit for more $...
    Besides the bling factor (if there is such, as SS is shiny and flashy), are there any advantages of using Ti spokes for mostly XC riding and no jumps, etc.?

    Thanks!

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    89
    I'm happy to be flamed for this one, but wouldn't ti spokes be more flexy than SS?
    Actually, probably no more that the DT Revolution 2.0/1.5

  3. #3
    TranceX Rider
    Reputation: Onie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    951
    Me to0! I'd more than happy to be flamed. So...Flame on! Guess, you'd be plagued with flex issues--ti spokes...
    Quote Originally Posted by jcatienza
    There was no need to scare potential buyers and burn bridges "buddy"
    Tell me now, what's Product testing all bout then?

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    207
    If too much flex is indeed an issue, then I'd probably trade in the bragging rights and bling of the titanium spokes for the best stainless steel spokes I can find. Saving an ounce of weight is great, but not at the expense of having a less dependable wheelset, no matter how exclusive the titanium spoked set might be.

    Hopefully there'll be some more input, especially by those who have used both...

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Slobberdoggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    936
    People are using some of the thinner dt swiss double butted spokes that *I think* are lighter than the cx-rays and cheaper.

    If you really wanted ti - marwi is sort of a cheaper brand. you might take a look at pillar - they have a cool bladed ti spoke that is among the lightest.

    I'm prepared to be flamed but I'm not so sure ti spokes are necessarily flexy when built properly. I though you had to tension them so high (to loose the flex?) that they became somewhat fragile.

    If I was you and had $$ I would just get a complete Extralite wheelset with ti spokes. Ultimately, what you want are the butted dt swiss spokes "super comps". Hopefully someone more ka-nowlegable will post and you might get some info with a search for weights of spokes if that is your real interest.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    288
    Quote Originally Posted by Slobberdoggy
    I'm prepared to be flamed but I'm not so sure ti spokes are necessarily flexy when built properly.
    i've built a few sets of marwi spoked wheels & have never had issue with flex that i could percieve. makes for a surprisingly stable & burly wheel with great longevity (and these are dh/freeride wheelsets to boot). they're pretty too:


  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    207
    I'll look at Pillar; thanks!

    Those wheelsets are definitely bling... I assume that the colors produced are the result of electrical anodization, as opposed to the "dye anodization" used for aluminum products. Your wheelset certainly looks strong and well made.

    Thanks!

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    1,246
    I raced and rode Ti spoked wheels for years back in the late 90s early 00s. They were DT MMC Ti spokes on XT hubs and Mavic 517 ceramic rims. At the time I was 175 lbs, and using a noodly 98 and 99 SID Race. I would easily get the rim to rub the brake pads, but how much of that was the flex of the fork, and how much was the wheel build, I don't know. I never had any rear wheel rub.

    I loved the wheels, and they are now on my wife's hardtail. I originally went with these spokes to soften the ride on my Giant ATX890 hardtail, as my back was taking a pounding from the steel spoked wheels I had before. I only ever had 1 spoke failure, and that was after a really badly landed jump on the XC course I was riding which tacoed the front wheel.

  9. #9
    No. Just No. Moderator
    Reputation: Circlip's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    4,618
    The amount of flex purely from choice of spokes (not getting into build considerations) is a function of the material and the spoke cross section. Since the Ti spokes are generally a straight gauge 2.0, they have a lot more material than the thinnest sections of a 1.7 or 1.5 spoke.

    As stiff as a 2.0 straight gauge steel spoke? Of course not, but no one on this board is using 2.0 straight gauge spokes anyhow.

    As stiff or stiffer than a butted stainless spoke - perhaps...

    I've seen someone with actual data on this in the past, but I'm not inclined to go hunting around for it.

  10. #10
    Weight Weenie Shop Owner
    Reputation: DIRT BOY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    2,007
    Quote Originally Posted by Slobberdoggy

    If I was you and had $$ I would just get a complete Extralite wheelset with ti spokes.
    these?
    Attached Images Attached Images
    DIRT BOY
    Light-Bikes.com
    The Largest Site Dedicated to Light Weight Bikes and Sales
    Twitter: @lightbikes_com

  11. #11
    paco87
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    30
    I have been using a Cane Creek Team issue wheelset that came with ti spokes from the factory. I don't know the spokes brand but what I know is that I've been pounding these wheels mercilessly since 2000 and, up until a few months ago, I never had any problem with them. Recently a couple of the rear spokes have been breaking but if you take into consideration that my weight goes back and forth from 215 to 230 lbs, not very delicate, to say the least, and that my riding has been quite aggressive for the last 7 years, it should give you an idea of what a ti spoked wheelset can withstand. I forgot to add that I had never felt any flex at all. Guess the fact that I have always used forks with 32 mm stanchions may have helped a bit though. Just my 2 cents.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    207
    I appreciate the input from those who use or have used titanium spokes in the past! I'm about 185 #, so I should be fine should I go with the Ti spokes, and some of you definitely have a more aggressive riding style!!!

    Thanks again, for the information; you're helping me make some important decisions on my dream bike...

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    301
    Since the stiffness of titanium relative to steel is roughly in the same proportion as the density of titanium relative to steel, and given the way a spoke works, the stiffness of a spoke will be pretty much proportional to its weight, whether steel or ti. Therefore if your ti spokes are lighter than steel ones they will be more flexible. A straight gauge 2.0 ti spoke should be a little less stiff than a DT revolution and possibly also a little lighter, but without any of the advantages of butting, and with significantly less strength. Personally I'll be sticking with my steel spokes.

    BTW DT Revolution are pretty much the same stiffness as CX-Rays.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Some Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,485
    Quote Originally Posted by chrism
    BTW DT Revolution are pretty much the same stiffness as CX-Rays.
    I don't think that's really true. I've never used revos, but I've used Comps and CX-Rays and they feel pretty similar to me.
    www.yourtrails.net/weights/ - Kick ass weights listing
    racing.thylacinecycles.com - Racing silliness

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    301
    Quote Originally Posted by Some Guy
    I don't think that's really true. I've never used revos, but I've used Comps and CX-Rays and they feel pretty similar to me.
    Not really sure how your feelings have anything to do with it, unless you have calibrated hands. The basic facts are that the cross sectional are in the mid part of the spoke is approximately the same for DT Revs and CX-Rays (CX-Ray x-section can be approximated as an oval with the dimensions as published of 2.3mm by 0.9mm, hence 1.63mm2 - Rev x-section given 1.5mm round is 1.77mm2 - Comp x-section given 1.8mm round is 2.54mm2). Hardly surprising given the near identical weights, and that CX-Rays are purportedly made by flattening the mid section of Lasers (Sapim's version of Revs).

    The stiffness of a spoke along it's length is basic material science, and depends only upon the material - which is the same for all - and the x-sectional area.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    871

    not really,

    Quote Originally Posted by chrism
    Since the stiffness of titanium relative to steel is roughly in the same proportion as the density of titanium relative to steel, and given the way a spoke works, the stiffness of a spoke will be pretty much proportional to its weight, whether steel or ti. Therefore if your ti spokes are lighter than steel ones they will be more flexible. A straight gauge 2.0 ti spoke should be a little less stiff than a DT revolution and possibly also a little lighter, but without any of the advantages of butting, and with significantly less strength. Personally I'll be sticking with my steel spokes.

    BTW DT Revolution are pretty much the same stiffness as CX-Rays.
    a flattened spoke will ALWAYS be more flexable loaded perpendicular to the flat section.
    go try to jump off a round diving board. a round spoke will resist torsion better but a bladed
    spoke gives a softer ride, of same cross section of course.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Slobberdoggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    936
    Quote Originally Posted by chrism
    Not really sure how your feelings have anything to do with it, unless you have calibrated hands. The basic facts are that the cross sectional are in the mid part of the spoke is approximately the same for DT Revs and CX-Rays (CX-Ray x-section can be approximated as an oval with the dimensions as published of 2.3mm by 0.9mm, hence 1.63mm2 - Rev x-section given 1.5mm round is 1.77mm2 - Comp x-section given 1.8mm round is 2.54mm2). Hardly surprising given the near identical weights, and that CX-Rays are purportedly made by flattening the mid section of Lasers (Sapim's version of Revs).

    The stiffness of a spoke along it's length is basic material science, and depends only upon the material - which is the same for all - and the x-sectional area.
    So what's the deal with DT's Aerolites? I thought those were DT's version of CX-Rays? Just curious. Where do the aerolites lie in terms of weight and strength or whatever?

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    301
    Quote Originally Posted by peabody
    a flattened spoke will ALWAYS be more flexable loaded perpendicular to the flat section.
    go try to jump off a round diving board. a round spoke will resist torsion better but a bladed
    spoke gives a softer ride, of same cross section of course.
    Your first sentence is correct, but that having anything to do with the ride quality is a load of rubbish. You don't load spokes perpendicular to the flat section - the only load they see is at the ends in tension, so the shape makes no difference, as I said before, only the x-sectional area.

    In answer to SD - Aerolites are pretty much the same shape as CX-Rays, so much the same stiffness (and much the same as Revs). The only justification for using either of these over Revs is either aesthetics or on a road bike for aero benefit (which is why I'm using CX-Rays for my next wheel build). They are nominally stronger and more fatigue resistant, but that's only in the forged midsection, and that's not where spokes tend to break.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Slobberdoggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    936
    Quote Originally Posted by chrism
    In answer to SD - Aerolites are pretty much the same shape as CX-Rays, so much the same stiffness (and much the same as Revs). The only justification for using either of these over Revs is either aesthetics or on a road bike for aero benefit (which is why I'm using CX-Rays for my next wheel build). They are nominally stronger and more fatigue resistant, but that's only in the forged midsection, and that's not where spokes tend to break.
    And the aerolites are not lighter than the then CX-rays, comps or revs?

    A lot of the stock Tune wheelsets come with aerolites. Mine did and also at Str Bikes and Posh have them with aerolites.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Some Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,485
    Aerolites weigh the same as CX-Rays, a tiny bit lighter than revs (which are in turn a fairly substantial amount lighter than comps)
    www.yourtrails.net/weights/ - Kick ass weights listing
    racing.thylacinecycles.com - Racing silliness

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    871
    Quote Originally Posted by chrism
    Your first sentence is correct, but that having anything to do with the ride quality is a load of rubbish. You don't load spokes perpendicular to the flat section - the only load they see is at the ends in tension, so the shape makes no difference, as I said before, only the x-sectional area.

    In answer to SD - Aerolites are pretty much the same shape as CX-Rays, so much the same stiffness (and much the same as Revs). The only justification for using either of these over Revs is either aesthetics or on a road bike for aero benefit (which is why I'm using CX-Rays for my next wheel build). They are nominally stronger and more fatigue resistant, but that's only in the forged midsection, and that's not where spokes tend to break.
    so you are telling me when you hit a bump the spokes at the point of impact see no
    compression forces which get taken up by the tension of the other spokes. for the slight
    moment you hit something some spokes lose tension others gain it, therefore a bladed
    spoke will buckle far easier than a round one. this slight bending under compression
    that a round spoke resists more gives a softer ride. better go back to engineering class
    and study "radius of gyration" a little more closely. you are probably a 25yr old kid
    just out of school, you remind of kids that just get out of boot camp and think they can
    kick anybody's azz.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    301
    Quote Originally Posted by peabody
    so you are telling me when you hit a bump the spokes at the point of impact see no
    compression forces which get taken up by the tension of the other spokes. for the slight
    moment you hit something some spokes lose tension others gain it, therefore a bladed
    spoke will buckle far easier than a round one. this slight bending under compression
    that a round spoke resists more gives a softer ride. better go back to engineering class
    and study "radius of gyration" a little more closely. you are probably a 25yr old kid
    just out of school, you remind of kids that just get out of boot camp and think they can
    kick anybody's azz.
    Yep, I'm telling you that the spokes see no compression forces whatsoever, bump or no bump. I'm curious by what mechanism you think the spokes get compressed given the nipples are only constrained from moving inwards relative to the rim, not from moving outwards, so there is no way to actually put a compression force on the spoke at the rim end.

    Even if the spokes could support the rim in compression, as you've pointed out they would simply buckle (as they are already bent anyway), and so even round spokes would only contribute an insignificant amount to the wheel stiffness due to compression - the difference between them and bladed spokes would be lost in the noise.

    Given a properly built wheel with sufficient spoke tension, the spokes should never stop being in tension in normal use - if they do then you are on the verge of a bent rim or buckled wheel.

    Thanks for the ad hominem - for the record I've been making a living as a professional engineer for the last 15 years - how about you?

    For reference, try reading http://www.sheldonbrown.com/rinard/wheel/index.htm - lots of useful stuff by an engineer who knows what he's talking about there.

  23. #23
    mbtr member
    Reputation: scottzg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,671
    Quote Originally Posted by peabody
    you are probably a 25yr old kid just out of school,
    you remind of kids that just get out of boot camp and think they can
    kick anybody's azz.
    azz? Does anyone else find this quote funny?
    .

Posting Permissions

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