Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456
Results 501 to 570 of 570
  1. #501
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,141
    Quote Originally Posted by alexdi View Post
    Great video. That's probably the most common failure mode: the load exceeds the spoke tension, the spokes slack, the rim looses lateral stability and, with a relatively small additional load, tacos (alloy) or breaks (carbon).
    l.
    It is pretty cool to actually watch the rim deform and the spokes loosen.

    But I can't forgive Stan's marketing-speak garbage that follows, saying this makes for a faster wheel because it maintains more forward momentum. In reality, the type of wheel impact that causes full compression of the tire carcass and completely de-tensions spokes is rare, at least for a properly tensioned wheel and reasonable PSI. Hard to imagine something that is marginally better on events that occur a few times per season -- or even a few times per ride -- amounts to a faster wheel. Utter garbage.

    What they should really be marketing is longevity and reliability. Try to sow FUD (fear, uncertainy, doubt) about "generic" carbon rims being more likely to fail because they can't radially deflect without damage. Unfortunately for Stans, the data above from @light-bicycle showing 6.5mm and 8.5mm deflections in routine testing is comparable to the 7mm Stans brags about in the video. So any advantage to Stans is not apparent.

  2. #502
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    969
    Quote Originally Posted by InertiaMan View Post
    What you're being told is that what you're looking for doesn't exist. But you still want to find it.

    You seem to be missing the point of the "waxing." You're asking for opinions about something that doesn't exist: discernible differences in "ride quality" on "rough terrain" among wheels that differ only in their carbon layup.

    Lateral stiffness can vary substantially between alloy rim wheels and carbon rim wheels, and that variability can be felt on the trail. Apparently some riders prefer less lateral stiffness than others, at least if you believe the Jared Graves comments. If you want a noodle-y wheel, then pick your alloy rim, keep your spoke bracing angles low (avoid Boost!), etc. Have fun.

    But if you believe more lateral stiffness and more strength in the wheel is generally all good, and you're trying to pick a carbon rim, then make your choice based on rim width versus your intended tire choices, price, reputation/data suggesting the rim is well engineered, reported ease of tubeless seating, customer service / replacement policy in the case of failure or damage, preference/familiarity to your preferred wheel builder, spoke hole design (reinforced?), etc.

    The myth of ride quality should literally NOT be on the list, and you seem to be putting it at the top. Suggesting that one carbon wheel feels harsher than another carbon wheel of similar design is BS . . . control all the other variables (terrain, speed, rim width, tire, lacing pattern, tensions) and then vary the tire PSI by 0.25 and you will produce WAY more vertical compliance than is contributed by the rims/wheels during any typical aggressive riding.

    But let me give a direct response to your question: I've ridden the sh&^ out of multiple LB and Nextie rims on all sorts of chunky terrain, and I've never felt any undesirable ride quality. All the wheels were laced 32H 3X to 110-120kgf tension. My human senses could not detect any "harshness" contributed by the carbon material differences . . . because my senses were being stimulated by 5" of suspension travel and 2.4" of tire carcass.
    I know you want to grandstand and pontificate your knowledge about carbon wheels, and by all means have at it but don't use my question as an excuse for doing that. Maybe you're not understanding what I mean by "harshness"? Either way it sounds like you only two data points: LB and Nextie and you feel no negative effects. Thanks for your input.

  3. #503
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,141
    Quote Originally Posted by matadorCE View Post
    I know you want to grandstand and pontificate your knowledge about carbon wheels, and by all means have at it but don't use my question as an excuse for doing that. Maybe you're not understanding what I mean by "harshness"? Either way it sounds like you only two data points: LB and Nextie and you feel no negative effects. Thanks for your input.
    Why don't you tell us what you mean by "harshness"? Quantify it.
    And the "two" datapoints are actually 8 or 9 (different models from each maker).

    You literally asked for comment about differences in ride quality between the AM728 and the 650BC05:
    Quote Originally Posted by matadorCE View Post
    I tried searching the thread and on the forum but didn't find much. How is the ride quality of these wheels on rough terrain? I'm looking at the 650BC05 (30mm internal width) rims. If anyone is using the asymmetrical version (AM728), i'd like to hear ride quality comments on that too.
    I've answered with both direct riding experience (coincidentally, I have hundreds of hours on those exact rim cross sections from LB, and there is no discernible difference) and from an engineering/design perspective (there is no physical reason that one should expect any difference).

    I'm not grandstanding to show off. But I do hate seeing false myths perpetuated, so I've offered substantial evidence to show that perceived "harshness" due to radial stiffness in wheels is imaginary. My motivation is primarily to offer some clarity to other readers, and secondarily to potentially educate you in response to your questions. Clearly I'm failing on the latter.

    So hey, feel free to keep imagining a difference in "harshness" between a carbon rim with ~ 26mmx30mm cross section and one with ~ 28mmx28mm cross section despite the fact that neither of them move radially under normal loads. I'm sure the "better" choice is going to make all the difference in your ride experience.

  4. #504
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    284
    Quote Originally Posted by InertiaMan View Post
    Unfortunately for Stans, the data above from @light-bicycle showing 6.5mm and 8.5mm deflections in routine testing is comparable to the 7mm Stans brags about in the video. So any advantage to Stans is not apparent.
    The same force on an alloy rim would probably make it collapse. Maximum compliance!

  5. #505
    www.lightbicycle.com
    Reputation: light bicycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by InertiaMan View Post
    I call BS on the portion I bolded above. First of all, a rider will almost never experience that deflection, and if/when they do, it will be under such severe circumstances that they will be facing far more dramatic "feelings" than 2mm of rim movement. The deflection figures you are comparing are from an unlaced rim. On the trail, the same deflection would require a major force that would bottom out the suspension and the tires simultaneously, resulting in the total detensioning of the relevant spokes. And during that massive G-out or cased jump or direct rock impact at 30mph or whatever, do you really think this "discerning rider" is making a mental note of 2mm of rim movement, and how it influences his ride quality??? Or are they trying to hold on, not crash, and generally survive the situation?

    I could potentially believe that a rare rider could distinguish the larger cross section RM29C14 rim from a RM29C07 rim in a blind test ride, assuming the wheels are built to identical pattern and tension with identical tires at identical PSI. I'm skeptical this is true, but I will allow the possibility. However, the differences they would potentially feel are NOT from vertical compliance under worst-case wheel deformation . . . it would be from lateral stiffness, or slightly wider bead position. More likely, it would be from placebo effect.

    Having said all that, I do think its great to see confirmation that LB is doing extensive testing and data collection on the rims. I ride your rims, I like your rims. I just caution you against making non-technical interpretations of technical data and asserting them as fact. And re-think whether you want to be on the riders-CAN-feel-vertical-compliance-of-wheels side of this debate.
    My note about the 2mm difference had nothing to do with the amount of movement a rider would experience, it is data taken from a standard stiffness test and relating it to our findings on what a rider can notice. We perform other stiffness tests with more pressure, and more speed. I could have revealed a much larger number with that test (30mm for example), but all I was trying to say was that for our standard testing method, I know what numbers a discerning rider can feel. I have personally built more than a thousand carbon wheels, have advanced composite training, and have ridden at least 50 of our carbon wheelsets amongst others and I can feel the stiffness difference between the 2 rims in question once I wind them up to speed on black diamond trails I am familiar with.

    As a wheel builder, I realize that there are many other factors to wheel stiffness. It is very plausible that with using identical components at identical tension and using these 2 rims, you would still get a larger gain in wheel stiffness with the 38's due to shorter spokes.

    I think the rim stiffness and "compliance" arguments only matter for serious racers who have extensive experience on carbon rims. For the average rider coming off an alloy rim, carbon rims are going to behave significantly different so it's hard to make recommendations sometimes.
    http://www.lightbicycle.com
    http://www.us.lightbicycle.com (North American site)
    Instagram: @lightbicycle

  6. #506
    www.lightbicycle.com
    Reputation: light bicycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by alexdi View Post
    To build on an earlier post by Jayem, if we tested the vertical stiffness of a wheel in isolation and construed lower numbers to mean better ride quality, I don't believe CF would differ noticeably from alloy. The absolute deflection numbers are so low that, absent tires, they'd both ride horribly stiff.

    However, ride quality might differ if we subjected the wheel to more realistic combined vertical and lateral forces, and accounted for CF's ability to maintain a more consistent rim shape after lateral impacts. A rim that's noodling all over the place isn't passing the full acceleration of a wheel impact to the rider. It would feel vague first, and perhaps, depending on the tire, a bit smoother. Put a clyde on a Crest and this is what I would expect to hear.

    This is all a long way of saying: I'm not convinced compliance on the vertical axis engineered into a rim means anything, because I don't think you can make a wheel compliant (independent of a tire) unless you introduce undesirable lateral weakness.

    This may be wrong. I'd welcome some technical input from LB on the background for that decision.
    I should mention that for measuring a given rims vertical stiffness, it is more about improving it's ultimate compression failure result. In other words, we want to increase its ability to flex inward without cracking. Deep and wide rims are inherently stiff and have a greater risk of cracking through the sidewalls under sharp impacts (rim tries to compress briefly). We find that the impact strength improves when we make the stiffer U-shaped wide rims with more vertical flex. The layup change generally isn't noticeable by riders if the side stiffness is already quite high for the given rim, but it does help with impact test results in the lab and in the real world.
    http://www.lightbicycle.com
    http://www.us.lightbicycle.com (North American site)
    Instagram: @lightbicycle

  7. #507
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,141
    @lightbicycle, for clarity, I agree with 99% of what you've been posting here. Lateral deflection is real, it occurs under normal riding circumstances, and it can be felt by riders. Different rims will have measurably different lateral stiffness, even modestly different carbon rims. No doubt. That's one reason many of us like riding carbon rims, me included.

    But that is not what I've been challenging. You made a very specific assertion that 2mm of vertical compliance, or more accurately 2mm radial deformation under a given load on an unlaced rim test, can be felt in the resulting built-up wheel by discerning riders, even if all other parameters are identical. To quote:

    "2mm of variance on these rims is very noticeable to a discerning rider when all wheel build factors are identical and only the rim is different."

    That is the statement that I have been challenging. If all other attributes of a wheel are identical (including lateral stiffness), and the only time substantial radial deformation occurs is under worst case impact (when spoke tension goes negative), then what exactly is this discerning rider feeling? In "normal" use (ie, spokes maintain positive tension), even under a significant impact, the actual radial deformation in wheels is approx. 0.1mm to 0.5mm depending on rim material/design. I maintain that difference cannot be felt by any rider.

    Virtually all of your supporting observations relate to lateral stiffness, not radial. Consider your statement:

    Quote Originally Posted by light bicycle View Post
    As a wheel builder, I realize that there are many other factors to wheel stiffness. It is very plausible that with using identical components at identical tension and using these 2 rims, you would still get a larger gain in wheel stiffness with the 38's due to shorter spokes.
    The shorter spokes, assuming identical hubs, yield an increased bracing angle, which would yield a laterally stiffer wheel assuming same spoke count and tensions. And the 38mm rim should be inherently laterally stiffer due to its cross section. So absolutely, I believe that there is a measurable difference in lateral stiffness between these two wheels you mention. And I'll accept on faith your statement that some riders, yourself included, can feel the difference in those wheels. But those difference do virtually nothing to radial "stiffness"!

    Which supports my only point: that any difference in feeling between wheels is NOT due to differences in radial deformation capacity.

    If you want to prove that statement false, please show me an experiment with two rims:
    1) rim cross section dimensions are identical
    2) lateral deformation test values are identical
    3) spokes, lacing patterns, hubs and tensions are all identical
    4) tires and pressures are identical
    5) the sole difference in the rims is a 2mm difference in radial deformation capacity (of the bare rim under test load, not the built wheel), presumably achieved by varying layup.

    Now, have multiple riders do blind rides, and show that they can consistently identify the wheels that used the rims w/ slightly larger radial deflection capacity.

    Not gonna happen. That is my point. "Feeling" radial compliance (or radial "harshness") of wheels is a myth. With folks like Damon Rinard and Jobst Brandt on my side of the argument, I'm confident.

    Feeling lateral stiffness, on the other hand, is not a myth. I have no doubt that even modest riders can feel the substantial difference between poorly built alloy wheels and well built carbon wheels. And its believable that your "discerning riders" can feel modest differences between reasonably constructed carbon wheels. But no rider is feeling radial deformation, or lack thereof.

  8. #508
    www.lightbicycle.com
    Reputation: light bicycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    182
    Hi Inertia Man,

    There is a stiffness difference between those 2 rims in a built wheel, it's reasonably obvious and yet with mechanical testing the results are not that different. One is a bit stiffer laterally and one is a bit stiffer vertically on a naked rim. The one that is stiffer vertically feels significantly stiffer on the trail. I think this is a rare case when looking at the rim comparison results as you'd expect the rim that showed a little bit more side stiffness would feel stiffer on the trail, but that is not the case with these particular rims. Lateral stiffness is a far better indication on how the wheel will ride but there are other design elements that come into play.

    We have built prototype carbon rims that can be flexed 6 inches by hand vertically for test purposes, whereas a typical carbon rim of the same outer width flexes so little that you can barely feel it move. Even though they have similar side stiffness, in a built wheel they feel dramatically different. This is an extreme case, but even a novice rider could easily tell that they ride much different. The only similarities are side stiffness, the profiles and construction is dramatically different.

    You were talking about comparing 2 identical rims with a different amount of vertical flex and seeing if someone can feel the difference. I doubt anyone could. I was talking about comparing 2 completely different profiles and saying even though the side stiffness about the same, they feel different when built up as a wheel. The rim depth, layup schedule, and wall thickness throughout the rims are all very different so they behave differently.
    http://www.lightbicycle.com
    http://www.us.lightbicycle.com (North American site)
    Instagram: @lightbicycle

  9. #509
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    969
    Quote Originally Posted by InertiaMan View Post
    Why don't you tell us what you mean by "harshness"? Quantify it.
    And the "two" datapoints are actually 8 or 9 (different models from each maker).

    You literally asked for comment about differences in ride quality between the AM728 and the 650BC05:


    I've answered with both direct riding experience (coincidentally, I have hundreds of hours on those exact rim cross sections from LB, and there is no discernible difference) and from an engineering/design perspective (there is no physical reason that one should expect any difference).

    I'm not grandstanding to show off. But I do hate seeing false myths perpetuated, so I've offered substantial evidence to show that perceived "harshness" due to radial stiffness in wheels is imaginary. My motivation is primarily to offer some clarity to other readers, and secondarily to potentially educate you in response to your questions. Clearly I'm failing on the latter.

    So hey, feel free to keep imagining a difference in "harshness" between a carbon rim with ~ 26mmx30mm cross section and one with ~ 28mmx28mm cross section despite the fact that neither of them move radially under normal loads. I'm sure the "better" choice is going to make all the difference in your ride experience.
    Again, you're so busy arguing with yourself and trying to showboat about your knowledge of carbon rims that you didn't even understand my question. I even stated my question again and you still didn't get it. I asked how do these rims/wheels feel in comparison to other brands. Other brands. Even, Nox, Nobl, Knight, Sram, etc. I don't really care for your engineering analysis as I can do my own, I was asking for opinions and you keep trying to shove your "data" and "analysis" in this thread. Again, way to not read or understand the question.

  10. #510
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,933
    Quote Originally Posted by matadorCE View Post
    Again, you're so busy arguing with yourself and trying to showboat about your knowledge of carbon rims that you didn't even understand my question. I even stated my question again and you still didn't get it. I asked how do these rims/wheels feel in comparison to other brands. Other brands. Even, Nox, Nobl, Knight, Sram, etc. I don't really care for your engineering analysis as I can do my own, I was asking for opinions and you keep trying to shove your "data" and "analysis" in this thread. Again, way to not read or understand the question.
    You should ask Ford what they think of Chevy.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  11. #511
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    736
    Quote Originally Posted by matadorCE View Post
    Again, you're so busy arguing with yourself and trying to showboat about your knowledge of carbon rims that you didn't even understand my question. I even stated my question again and you still didn't get it. I asked how do these rims/wheels feel in comparison to other brands. Other brands. Even, Nox, Nobl, Knight, Sram, etc. I don't really care for your engineering analysis as I can do my own, I was asking for opinions and you keep trying to shove your "data" and "analysis" in this thread. Again, way to not read or understand the question.
    Dude, he answered your question clearly, he just gave data; to summarize his answer: "the same".

  12. #512
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,141
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    You should ask Ford what they think of Chevy.
    Or ask a fan of tube amps about mosfet's.

  13. #513
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    969
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    You should ask Ford what they think of Chevy.
    Oh I'm sorry, did I somehow stumble on onto the forum of the Light Bicycles website or is this still MTBR? Last I checked this wasn't the "LB Carbon Wheels DO NOT TALK ABOUT OTHER BRANDS" thread.
    Geez, what the hell is up with people on this thread? Questions like mine get asked all the damn time on this site about specific bikes, forks, shocks, drivetrain, etc. The fact that no one has really answered my question besides some obsessive-compulsive dude bogged on minutiae is huge red flag that hardly anyone is riding these wheels.

  14. #514
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ARandomBiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    1,927
    Quote Originally Posted by matadorCE View Post
    ...{snip}.. hardly anyone is riding these wheels.
    Do you mean this *specific* model of LB wheels?
    or LB in general?
    I'd hazard a guess that LB is the most prolific of all imported carbon rim brands. Of the 6 guys I ride with on carbon rims, 4 of them are LB. My Nextie's and another guy's NOXs are the 'oddballs'. Hell, look at the Chinese carbon rim mega thread, LB is pretty much "the standard" until recently when CarbonFan,XMCarbonSpeed, EIE and a few others started popping up.

    In an attempt to answer your question: I've ridden 4 brands of carbon: Nextie, LB, NOX and one set of Rovals. all about 28-30 inner. One set was the old LB 38s (i31.8) Doing my best to remove the bike from the equation, yeah they all felt pretty much the same.
    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Yeah, why not?

  15. #515
    mtbr member
    Reputation: RS VR6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    3,900
    Quote Originally Posted by ARandomBiker View Post

    In an attempt to answer your question: I've ridden 4 brands of carbon: Nextie, LB, NOX and one set of Rovals. all about 28-30 inner. One set was the old LB 38s (i31.8) Doing my best to remove the bike from the equation, yeah they all felt pretty much the same.
    They probably come from the same factory.

  16. #516
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ARandomBiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    1,927
    Quote Originally Posted by RS VR6 View Post
    They probably come from the same factory.
    It's been theorized before. I won't say it's not at least partially true. There's a lot of grey info. It wouldn't surprise me, and wouldn't put me off. Most frames are laid-up (is that the right past tense of layup?) in a very small part of China. They've gotten pretty good at it. Something like 90% of the world's carbon fiber comes from the Toray company.

    My understanding of the situation is as follows, and I hope LB chimes in to confirm or correct:

    Nextie and LB are (or were at some time in the past) produced at the same physical address, but used molds that were specific to the brand, hence why asym profiles were a little different and no one but LB were making a 38mm external rim. Nextie used to offer two different lay-up orientations: 45 degrees and a 30/60 degree.
    It seems like they might be in the same place, the same way the same tire plant makes a few brands. Vee and Surly, Panaracer and I think Performance house brand Forte...

    I don't know jack about NOX, nothing I've read yields much info about their origin other than they aren't claiming "made in the US".
    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Yeah, why not?

  17. #517
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    284
    Quote Originally Posted by light bicycle View Post
    ... it's reasonably obvious and yet with mechanical testing the results are not that different.
    Have you found the FEA for each rim to support what your riders are telling you?

    If you don't trust the actual wheel deflection numbers, you might try doing a test with a ramp, a wheeled sled, an obstacle, and an accelerometer. That'd tell you directly whether a vertically-compliant rim delivers a vertically-complaint ride without adding variables you can't easily control.

  18. #518
    www.lightbicycle.com
    Reputation: light bicycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by ARandomBiker View Post
    It's been theorized before. I won't say it's not at least partially true. There's a lot of grey info. It wouldn't surprise me, and wouldn't put me off. Most frames are laid-up (is that the right past tense of layup?) in a very small part of China. They've gotten pretty good at it. Something like 90% of the world's carbon fiber comes from the Toray company.

    My understanding of the situation is as follows, and I hope LB chimes in to confirm or correct:

    Nextie and LB are (or were at some time in the past) produced at the same physical address, but used molds that were specific to the brand, hence why asym profiles were a little different and no one but LB were making a 38mm external rim. Nextie used to offer two different lay-up orientations: 45 degrees and a 30/60 degree.
    It seems like they might be in the same place, the same way the same tire plant makes a few brands. Vee and Surly, Panaracer and I think Performance house brand Forte...

    I don't know jack about NOX, nothing I've read yields much info about their origin other than they aren't claiming "made in the US".
    We do not sell our rims to trading companies in China which is what happens with many Chinese manufacturers. Quite a few years ago we sold some rims to other companies in China, but the problem was that you lose control over the customer experience and how the other company represents you (if they represent you at all). So we decided to not sell to any trading companies.

    There are a lot of carbon rim manufacturers in China, but there are even more trading companies and it's traditionally the trading companies that become more prominent. That is what leads to so much confusion about what you are even buying as they may private label rims from several suppliers.

    When you buy a Light Bicycle rim, it is coming from us directly. We were early adopters in the direct to consumer approach and have a stronger website than some competitors. So we often find our pictures and information on others websites (even though we do not sell to them). More confusion ensues...

    The direct to consumer model was originally developed because we needed more feedback from riders on what we should make. We were starting out and didn't have big bike companies to produce rims for. We thought if some big bike companies heard about us through consumers, they might consider using us as a manufacturer. After a few years though, we were able to get enough end-consumer orders that we became stabilized and didn't need to rely on a big bike company to help us grow.

    We do produce some rims for other smaller brands and most of which own their molds at the factory and aid in the development to make their products unique. Naturally we cannot disclose any of that information beyond what I've said.
    http://www.lightbicycle.com
    http://www.us.lightbicycle.com (North American site)
    Instagram: @lightbicycle

  19. #519
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    130
    Quote Originally Posted by InertiaMan View Post
    That is my point. "Feeling" radial compliance (or radial "harshness") of wheels is a myth. With folks like Damon Rinard and Jobst Brandt on my side of the argument, I'm confident.

    Feeling lateral stiffness, on the other hand, is not a myth. I have no doubt that even modest riders can feel the substantial difference between poorly built alloy wheels and well built carbon wheels. And its believable that your "discerning riders" can feel modest differences between reasonably constructed carbon wheels. But no rider is feeling radial deformation, or lack thereof.
    Hi InertiaMan, I have also the Rinard and Brandt stuff, and have always been inclined to agree with your stance on the topic of vertical compliance. I am curious to get your take on a few topics that I have pondered, but can't recall seeing addressed before:

    1. Radial stiffness of a complete wheel is largely a factor of maintaining spoke tension, whereas lateral stiffness is more related to the rim itself. Under lateral loads with even a fairly stiff rim, it is possible cause a significant detensioning of the spokes on one side of the wheel, for example when you are riding freshly built wheels in a parking lot and lean the bike dramatically under you, while keeping your weight over the tire contact patches, causing the spokes to "ping". Under conditions of that nature, since the lateral load has substantially or fully detensioned some of the spokes, the spokes' contribution to the radial stiffness of the wheel would be reduced and, under a combined radial/lateral load, the more radially flexible rim would now exhibit significantly more radial compliance, because the rim itself has become a much larger player in the mix. I understand that this would only be in events where there is a total loss of tension on a few spokes from the combined forces. I guess what I am saying it that I have wondered if those events might be more common than realized when you consider cornering in bumpy terrain, and that "lateral compliance" in isolation, may result in increased radial compliance on the trail.

    2. Related to those spoke detensioning events, have you ever seen any dynamic measures of spoke tension from actual rides? I have always been curious to see what the spokes are doing when subjected to 3D loads. 3D loads could certainly be measured in the lab, but I am not sure that the loading models would be reflective of the actual stuff people are riding.

    3. None of these measures take into account the torsional stiffness of the rim around its own axis. By torsional, I mean as if you were to grab the rim with vice grips that spanned the two sidewalls, and applied force to twist the rim's cross section. It would be possible for a rim to flex in that direction without a significant change in tension on the spokes, and that could account for some of the radial "compliance" people report, although it would only come into play on off axis impacts.

    The potential increase in radial compliance in the more extreme events in item 1 aside, I have always figured that the "harshness" that most people attribute to excess radial stiffness is really a combination of placebo mixed with a misattribution of lateral and perhaps torsional stiffness. When you consider things like leaning the bike over to 45 degrees in bumpy a corner, and/or going through a rock garden with all sorts of off axis impacts, people are likely to feel more feedback through their hands with a laterally stiffer rim and, due to the angulation of the rider, the line between lateral/radial from the rider experience, is much more blurred.

  20. #520
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    130
    Quote Originally Posted by light bicycle View Post
    Hi Inertia Man,

    There is a stiffness difference between those 2 rims in a built wheel, it's reasonably obvious and yet with mechanical testing the results are not that different. One is a bit stiffer laterally and one is a bit stiffer vertically on a naked rim. The one that is stiffer vertically feels significantly stiffer on the trail. I think this is a rare case when looking at the rim comparison results as you'd expect the rim that showed a little bit more side stiffness would feel stiffer on the trail, but that is not the case with these particular rims. Lateral stiffness is a far better indication on how the wheel will ride but there are other design elements that come into play.

    We have built prototype carbon rims that can be flexed 6 inches by hand vertically for test purposes, whereas a typical carbon rim of the same outer width flexes so little that you can barely feel it move. Even though they have similar side stiffness, in a built wheel they feel dramatically different. This is an extreme case, but even a novice rider could easily tell that they ride much different. The only similarities are side stiffness, the profiles and construction is dramatically different.

    You were talking about comparing 2 identical rims with a different amount of vertical flex and seeing if someone can feel the difference. I doubt anyone could. I was talking about comparing 2 completely different profiles and saying even though the side stiffness about the same, they feel different when built up as a wheel. The rim depth, layup schedule, and wall thickness throughout the rims are all very different so they behave differently.
    In reference to this scenario you mention: "Even though they have similar side stiffness, in a built wheel they feel dramatically different. This is an extreme case, but even a novice rider could easily tell that they ride much different. The only similarities are side stiffness, the profiles and construction is dramatically different." Is it possible that none of the dramatically different ride feel is due to the radial compliance difference, and instead riders were feeling a difference in torsional stiffness between rims? I would imagine that a rim that radially compliant would be much easier to twist, even if lateral stiffness was equivalent. Out of curiousity, do you guys have any torsional stiffness figures for various rims that you can share with us, as you have generously done with radial/lateral?

    In reference to this: "You were talking about comparing 2 identical rims with a different amount of vertical flex and seeing if someone can feel the difference. I doubt anyone could. I was talking about comparing 2 completely different profiles and saying even though the side stiffness about the same, they feel different when built up as a wheel. The rim depth, layup schedule, and wall thickness throughout the rims are all very different so they behave differently. It sounds like you are saying that there is a bigger player in the "feel" of a rim than vertical or lateral flex, and that player has to do with "rim depth, layup schedule, and wall thickness". What traits of the rim do you think depth, layup, and thickness of the rim are altering, if not radial/lateral stiffness?

    Also, do you guys measure the ability of the rim's cross section to compress, as if you were squeezing a tube? I think some of the Zipp road tubular rims claim to have flex of this sort engineered in, but that seems much easier on a tubular rim as it has a cross section that lends itself to this. Even still, some of the deeper clinchers do have a lot of open space in the middle.

    P.S. Props to you guys for being so active in the forum, and being willing to answer the tough questions! I guess that may be a product of a consumer direct business model, but it is refreshing to see. So many brands either ignore this stuff, or only pop in when there is a new product release to collect a few accolades, and then they disappear.

  21. #521
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,141
    Quote Originally Posted by TheKaiser View Post
    Also, do you guys measure the ability of the rim's cross section to compress, as if you were squeezing a tube? I think some of the Zipp road tubular rims claim to have flex of this sort engineered in, but that seems much easier on a tubular rim as it has a cross section that lends itself to this. Even still, some of the deeper clinchers do have a lot of open space in the middle.
    In theory, this could provide some amount of radial "compliance" since the compression of the rim cross section could be independent of the pre-tensioned structure of the wheel. In practice, I don't think it is possible. In essence, you are saying that the rim would act like a second tire. Any force that would compress this rim "tube" would also be compressing the tire. Reasonably assuming the threshold for compression of the rim "tube" is higher than a force for compressing the tire, then the rim "tube" would only get compressed once the tire bottoms out against the rim.

  22. #522
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    1,141
    Quote Originally Posted by TheKaiser View Post
    Hi InertiaMan, I have also the Rinard and Brandt stuff, and have always been inclined to agree with your stance on the topic of vertical compliance. I am curious to get your take on a few topics that I have pondered, but can't recall seeing addressed before:

    1. Radial stiffness of a complete wheel is largely a factor of maintaining spoke tension, whereas lateral stiffness is more related to the rim itself. Under lateral loads with even a fairly stiff rim, it is possible cause a significant detensioning of the spokes on one side of the wheel, for example when you are riding freshly built wheels in a parking lot and lean the bike dramatically under you, while keeping your weight over the tire contact patches, causing the spokes to "ping". Under conditions of that nature, since the lateral load has substantially or fully detensioned some of the spokes, the spokes' contribution to the radial stiffness of the wheel would be reduced and, under a combined radial/lateral load, the more radially flexible rim would now exhibit significantly more radial compliance, because the rim itself has become a much larger player in the mix. I understand that this would only be in events where there is a total loss of tension on a few spokes from the combined forces. I guess what I am saying it that I have wondered if those events might be more common than realized when you consider cornering in bumpy terrain, and that "lateral compliance" in isolation, may result in increased radial compliance on the trail.

    2. Related to those spoke detensioning events, have you ever seen any dynamic measures of spoke tension from actual rides? I have always been curious to see what the spokes are doing when subjected to 3D loads. 3D loads could certainly be measured in the lab, but I am not sure that the loading models would be reflective of the actual stuff people are riding.

    3. None of these measures take into account the torsional stiffness of the rim around its own axis. By torsional, I mean as if you were to grab the rim with vice grips that spanned the two sidewalls, and applied force to twist the rim's cross section. It would be possible for a rim to flex in that direction without a significant change in tension on the spokes, and that could account for some of the radial "compliance" people report, although it would only come into play on off axis impacts.

    The potential increase in radial compliance in the more extreme events in item 1 aside, I have always figured that the "harshness" that most people attribute to excess radial stiffness is really a combination of placebo mixed with a misattribution of lateral and perhaps torsional stiffness. When you consider things like leaning the bike over to 45 degrees in bumpy a corner, and/or going through a rock garden with all sorts of off axis impacts, people are likely to feel more feedback through their hands with a laterally stiffer rim and, due to the angulation of the rider, the line between lateral/radial from the rider experience, is much more blurred.
    Responding in order:

    1) First need to correct some statements/perceptions. Assuming a laced wheel structure remains under tension, the spoke tension actually doesn't play a role in the vertical compliance (= displacement due to low radial stiffness) of a wheel. Seems counter-intuitive at first, but its only the spoke gauge, pattern, rim modulus of elasticity and rim moment of inertia that contribute. Read the Nox Composites webpage if you want the math/science. Lateral flexibility is determined by not only the rim itself (material, cross section) but substantially by spoke count, bracing angle and pattern (notably absent again: spoke tension). All that said, I agree that the different feel of different lateral stiffness likely explains how some riders describe more-harsh/less-harsh wheels. But I disagree that any during-ride variability in vertical compliance is contributing (or even possible).

    2) I'd love to see a wheel built using all aramid or kevlar cord (like FiberFix replacement spokes) in place of traditional spokes, with a micromachined silicon tensionmeter laced into each "spoke" transmitting realtime tensions to a data logger. But the practical hurdles (and costs) are high, and the rewards are unclear, so unlikely to happen.

    3) what you seem to be describing is two opposing lateral forces, which have offset locations where they are directed onto the tire/rim. While this could alter spoke tensions, those changes in spoke tension will not change the radial deformation (at least until tension goes < 0). Also, those forces are not only going to want to produce lateral deformation or deflection; since they are offset, they will also want to produce a rotation of the fork around the steering axis, which the rider must resist. Among the many things for a rider to feel in such a situation, radial deformation is still the lowest on the list by orders of magnitude, so hard to imagine it is distinguishable Remember, we're taking about a radial distance of a few human hairs, amidst a cacophony of so many other far greater forces/distances.

    To summarize my perspective:
    a) I have no doubt that different wheels feel different to riders.
    b) the adjectives used are arbitrary (harsh, forgiving, compliant, whatever).
    c) ignoring the corner case of total de-tensioning of spokes (and potential wheel failure), the "vertical compliance" of a laced bicycle wheel is extremely small and varies very little among wheels. Between the lightest alloy wheels and the thickest/deepest carbon wheels, the variability is literally about 1/100th of an inch. This is a fact of physics that is well documented.
    d) given the above, perceptions of wheel behavior CANNOT be accurately attributed to more/less vertical compliance.
    e) assuming one controls for all other variables (rim width, tire, tire pressure, etc) that leaves few other attributes to 'blame" for "wheel feel" other than lateral stiffness, and the many consequences it has, and the myriad ways that a rider may respond to that input.

    This leaves a lot of potential space for a rim maker, wheel builder, or rider to play. Is there a sweetspot for lateral stiffness? Or is more always better? Assuming there is a "curve" of how lateral stiffness changes during a lateral deformation event, is there a curve that feels better/worse to some riders? Can a carbon rim make alter layups to influence that "curve" and produce a rim/wheel that pleases riders?

    I think it will be great to see rim/wheel evolution in that regard. Just don't attribute it to vertical compliance, at least so long as the wheel is a laced spoke variety.

  23. #523
    www.lightbicycle.com
    Reputation: light bicycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    182
    Hi Kaiser,

    The thread is getting massive so I will try to respond here without all of the quotes. regarding torsion testing, we haven't done that testing as far as I recall. You could be right about that coming into play for those 2 rims we were discussing as the difference in feel is noticeable on the trail and the rims test our surprisingly similar lateral/vertical considering their obvious construction differences.

    Regarding your question: What traits of the rim do you think depth, layup, and thickness of the rim are altering, if not radial/lateral stiffness?

    A deeper rim would increase torsional stiffness. Additional wall thickness would increase stiffness as well but you'd need to look at the layup construction to figure out what would change, and also where you added the extra thickness. Adding material to the nipple bed for example can significantly alter the vertical stiffness, but so can simply changing the orientation. There are many different layers in that area so there is a lot of combinations for choosing between 45's 90's, 0 degree and you alter layers to build up the strength and stiffness to the desired amount. You can also use different types of carbon fibre, T800 for example will behave much differently from T700. I guess what I'm trying to say is that there are so many different factors that go into how a rim rides and performs. We could make 1,000+ different versions of a rim from the same mold and get them to ride differently. Looking at a profile of a rim certainly does not tell the whole story.

    I'm not quite sure I'm following your last question about measuring the rims compression. Do you mean, forces squeezing the rim sidewalls together? Or what happens to a rim when you inflate a tire?

    Thanks for the kind words about our participation on this forum. More than a few people have told us going to the forums was crazy and that we should just read the comments but not engage. If you sell direct to consumers, I think you owe it to them to put yourself out there.
    http://www.lightbicycle.com
    http://www.us.lightbicycle.com (North American site)
    Instagram: @lightbicycle

  24. #524
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    841
    Which rim do you recommend for 650b with 2.3-2.6 tyre wide mainly use for enduro/dh?

    Is there possible to increase warranty at least 3 years, because nextie offers 3 years warranty and zelvy has 5 years warranty. Both brands are cheaper than ur rims.

    What is the main difference between you rims to nextie. It looks like all profile rims are same as light-bicycle.

  25. #525
    www.lightbicycle.com
    Reputation: light bicycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by rave81 View Post
    Which rim do you recommend for 650b with 2.3-2.6 tyre wide mainly use for enduro/dh?

    Is there possible to increase warranty at least 3 years, because nextie offers 3 years warranty and zelvy has 5 years warranty. Both brands are cheaper than ur rims.

    What is the main difference between you rims to nextie. It looks like all profile rims are same as light-bicycle.
    Our current warranty is for 1 year. Our rims are completely different from the one's you mentioned, the only similarity would be some of the dimensions may be similar. Our rims and molds are made at a completely different factory so all of the processes in the rims would be unique.

    Our RM650BC13 would probably be the most popular choice for what you're after, it's 31,6mm internally, 38 external and can be ordered in an HD version. The EN733 would be a bit wider, it's asymmetric so it would have more even tension and has a longer crash replacement policy (2 years 25% off). The EN733 is 33,6 inside so it's quite wide for a 2.3" tire but might be fine for you depending on your tire choice. The EN733's with some Maxxis 2.4/2.5" Minion WT tires is hard to beat performance wise.
    http://www.lightbicycle.com
    http://www.us.lightbicycle.com (North American site)
    Instagram: @lightbicycle

  26. #526
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    130
    Quote Originally Posted by light bicycle View Post
    I'm not quite sure I'm following your last question about measuring the rims compression. Do you mean, forces squeezing the rim sidewalls together? Or what happens to a rim when you inflate a tire?
    Thank you for the thorough reply. Regarding the above bit about compression, I was referring to the ability of the rim itself to compress under impact load, without altering the round structure or spoke tension of the overall wheel/spoke bed area.

    To put it another way, imagine the rim's cross section. I am wondering if there is any measurable deflection and rebound, within the cross section the cross section, when an impact force is applied to the tire side, and a opposite supportive/resistive force is supplied by the spokes.

    It would be the same as if a drinking straw represented the rim cross section and you squeeze the straw with your 2 fingers, which represent the two forces mentioned above. The straw deflects from round to oval in cross section, and then springs back. Does the rim cross section flex in a similar way, such that its depth measured from spoke bed to top of sidewall edge is reduced, and then spring back to its original shape?

  27. #527
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    2,134
    I noticed on the cn website that the mtb wheels have the cool looking decals, but the road bike wheels don't have that option. Is that going to change soon?
    '12 Scott Spark 29 Team
    '13 Scott Scale 970
    '11 Scott Speedster S20
    '99 Spec' FSR Comp
    '9x Spec' Hardrock Cromo rigid

  28. #528
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    130
    Quote Originally Posted by InertiaMan View Post
    1) First need to correct some statements/perceptions. Assuming a laced wheel structure remains under tension, the spoke tension actually doesn't play a role in the vertical compliance (= displacement due to low radial stiffness) of a wheel. Seems counter-intuitive at first, but its only the spoke gauge, pattern, rim modulus of elasticity and rim moment of inertia that contribute. Read the Nox Composites webpage if you want the math/science. Lateral flexibility is determined by not only the rim itself (material, cross section) but substantially by spoke count, bracing angle and pattern (notably absent again: spoke tension). All that said, I agree that the different feel of different lateral stiffness likely explains how some riders describe more-harsh/less-harsh wheels. But I disagree that any during-ride variability in vertical compliance is contributing (or even possible).

    3) what you seem to be describing is two opposing lateral forces, which have offset locations where they are directed onto the tire/rim. While this could alter spoke tensions, those changes in spoke tension will not change the radial deformation (at least until tension goes < 0). Also, those forces are not only going to want to produce lateral deformation or deflection; since they are offset, they will also want to produce a rotation of the fork around the steering axis, which the rider must resist. Among the many things for a rider to feel in such a situation, radial deformation is still the lowest on the list by orders of magnitude, so hard to imagine it is distinguishable Remember, we're taking about a radial distance of a few human hairs, amidst a cacophony of so many other far greater forces/distances.

    e) assuming one controls for all other variables (rim width, tire, tire pressure, etc) that leaves few other attributes to 'blame" for "wheel feel" other than lateral stiffness, and the many consequences it has, and the myriad ways that a rider may respond to that input.
    Regarding point 1. I am in total agreement regarding increased levels of spoke tension not contributing to increased wheel stiffness. When I said radial stiffness is a function of maintaining spoke tension, I should have said radial stiffness is a product of the presence of some minimum level of spoke tension, and beyond that minimum level (which is far below the typical range a builder uses), does nothing.

    Regarding point 3. The torsional deflection I was thinking of was of the sort where there is a direct impact load to one half of the tread area of the tire, such that the tire carcass is twisted to the side of the impact, with that half of the tire compressing and the other half of the tire being pulled over toward the side of the impact. This sort of thing will occur when you just barely nail the edge of a rock. I am wondering if the rim sidewall and bead seat area on that side would be able to twist with the impact toward the wheel center, while the opposite sidewall and bead seat would move in an opposing direction, away from the wheel center. This could all occur without any radial compression of the spoke bed/wheel, as the rim would be twisting around that point, with the spoke bed being a fulcrum of sorts.


    I agree that this sort of thing will be a minimal contributor. It is just that I am trying to think of anything else that could account for the different "feel" that people report, since we are in agreement that radial stiffness is likely not it.

  29. #529
    www.lightbicycle.com
    Reputation: light bicycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by TheKaiser View Post
    Thank you for the thorough reply. Regarding the above bit about compression, I was referring to the ability of the rim itself to compress under impact load, without altering the round structure or spoke tension of the overall wheel/spoke bed area.

    To put it another way, imagine the rim's cross section. I am wondering if there is any measurable deflection and rebound, within the cross section the cross section, when an impact force is applied to the tire side, and a opposite supportive/resistive force is supplied by the spokes.

    It would be the same as if a drinking straw represented the rim cross section and you squeeze the straw with your 2 fingers, which represent the two forces mentioned above. The straw deflects from round to oval in cross section, and then springs back. Does the rim cross section flex in a similar way, such that its depth measured from spoke bed to top of sidewall edge is reduced, and then spring back to its original shape?
    Okay I understand now, thank you. We have been paying more attention to this the past year. We have built prototype rims with drastically different profiles to test the extremes of these kinds of forces so they can be tested with more obvious results. You want the rim to be able to spread the impact force through the sidewall. If the radius isn't right for the given stiffness of the rims then the sidewalls can crack too easily. Some rim designs excel in this area better than others and we've been able to learn from that. Measuring the change is difficult, but yes the cross section can change shape slightly, and naturally the amount of change varies depending on the rim's shape, layup design, depth etc.
    http://www.lightbicycle.com
    http://www.us.lightbicycle.com (North American site)
    Instagram: @lightbicycle

  30. #530
    www.lightbicycle.com
    Reputation: light bicycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by zephxiii View Post
    I noticed on the cn website that the mtb wheels have the cool looking decals, but the road bike wheels don't have that option. Is that going to change soon?
    Yes, we've got some alternate graphics we're trying. We had done a poll showing quite a few design ideas and this one was the most popular so this is what we'll likely go with. We're testing these in glossy black, and a few colors before finalizing.

    Light Bicycle Carbon Rims-image.jpg
    http://www.lightbicycle.com
    http://www.us.lightbicycle.com (North American site)
    Instagram: @lightbicycle

  31. #531
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    130
    Quote Originally Posted by light bicycle View Post
    Okay I understand now, thank you. We have been paying more attention to this the past year. We have built prototype rims with drastically different profiles to test the extremes of these kinds of forces so they can be tested with more obvious results. You want the rim to be able to spread the impact force through the sidewall. If the radius isn't right for the given stiffness of the rims then the sidewalls can crack too easily. Some rim designs excel in this area better than others and we've been able to learn from that. Measuring the change is difficult, but yes the cross section can change shape slightly, and naturally the amount of change varies depending on the rim's shape, layup design, depth etc.
    Thanks for that additional info! If you guys have any more data on that topic from continued testing, please post it here or on your website. I know that if faced with the choice between 2 rims with similar specs, I would likely go with the one that demonstrated more of this sort of compliance, both for the potential to improve the ride, and in hopes that on a hard hit it would be more likely to flex rather than crack.

  32. #532
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    5
    I've been searching for a carbon wheelset for my Turner Czar. I don't ride very aggressive and weighs 70 kg. I assume with 28 spokes 29c19 rims would be a good match for me. I was hoping to get as wide as I can on ID but keep below 400 grams per rim. I normally run 2.25 Racing Ralph or Rocket Ron...sometime I switch to 2.35 Nobby for real loose or rough conditions. Any suggestions?!

    Currently I'm on Stans Crest wheelset... with a slight dent on the rear rim total rider error.. I kept on going knowing I had a slow leak in the rear and running way low pressure. I normally run about 20 psi

    Thank you!!

  33. #533
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,933
    Quote Originally Posted by speedwei View Post
    I've been searching for a carbon wheelset for my Turner Czar. I don't ride very aggressive and weighs 70 kg. I assume with 28 spokes 29c19 rims would be a good match for me. I was hoping to get as wide as I can on ID but keep below 400 grams per rim. I normally run 2.25 Racing Ralph or Rocket Ron...sometime I switch to 2.35 Nobby for real loose or rough conditions. Any suggestions?!

    Currently I'm on Stans Crest wheelset... with a slight dent on the rear rim total rider error.. I kept on going knowing I had a slow leak in the rear and running way low pressure. I normally run about 20 psi

    Thank you!!
    I have the nextie 25/30mm 29er rims, they are around 400g (supposed to come in a bit below, but mine are painted). I assume LB has something similar. That size is a good match for an 29er XC bike IME, I even beat the hell out of them DHing and racing, then relaced them for my pivot XC bike. I don't think you need to worry too much about strength, but if it were me, at a similar weight, I'd go 32 spokes in the rear and build with revolution 2.0/1.5s, rather than go to 28 spokes. Go 28 spokes on the front, where the forces are less. I just put a 2.25 "racing ralph" on the rear too. I'm not impressed so far, it's a little skinnier than the michelin 2.1 wild raceR, which balloons out nicely on these rims. I got the racing ralph for a specific race, but I'll put the other wild raceR back on after I'm done, as I'm pretty happy with their profile.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  34. #534
    www.lightbicycle.com
    Reputation: light bicycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by speedwei View Post
    I've been searching for a carbon wheelset for my Turner Czar. I don't ride very aggressive and weighs 70 kg. I assume with 28 spokes 29c19 rims would be a good match for me. I was hoping to get as wide as I can on ID but keep below 400 grams per rim. I normally run 2.25 Racing Ralph or Rocket Ron...sometime I switch to 2.35 Nobby for real loose or rough conditions. Any suggestions?!

    Currently I'm on Stans Crest wheelset... with a slight dent on the rear rim total rider error.. I kept on going knowing I had a slow leak in the rear and running way low pressure. I normally run about 20 psi

    Thank you!!
    The RM29C19's are a great rim for XC/Trail. Here are a few listed weights of the 32h UD Matte rims we have in stock at the Chinese and USA warehouse: 387g,395g,396g,396g, 383g, 389g and in 28h we have one in stock at 404g for example. Keep in mind 32h rims are actually lighter on average because you have more holes in them. It's also easier to choose a lighter 32h rim for you as we produce a lot more 32h.

    Some of our 35mm wide 29" rims with the 30mm internal width come in at 410 grams per rim, so the weight difference isn't that large. If you look at your system weight, you could go to the bike shop and pick out 4 of the same tires and they will vary in weight quite a lot. Choose a lighter one of those and you could easily end up at the same weight or lighter than the narrower rims. So I would make the choice based on how wide you want to go in this case. For 2.25's I think you would be better off with the 24mm internal width if you decide to go with us.

    Are you looking for a complete wheelset? I know the guys at the North American warehouse have a new set of RM29C19's built onto DT240's on special, it uses 12k glossy 28h rims front and back. 142x12 XD, 100x15mm. support@us.lightbicycle.com
    http://www.lightbicycle.com
    http://www.us.lightbicycle.com (North American site)
    Instagram: @lightbicycle

  35. #535
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    569
    Late joining this party, are there any LB coupon codes available for 1st time buyers? If so please post or PM me. Ready to purchase a new set. Thanks!

  36. #536
    I like turtles
    Reputation: TiGeo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    5,947
    Just received my LB asym XC923s that my LBS laced up to a set of Roval hubs I had from my old wheels - they order the rims in a group buy. Sapim D-Light spokes. DT alloy locking nips + washers. Crazy nice wheels. 23mm internal is HUGE to me, certainly compared to the 19mm Roval's I had....my 2.35 Maxxis Ikon finally measures 2.35! Total OTD LBS build was $740. Very impressed with these rims. Took about a month from order to delivery. I will be ordering another set this fall for my gravel/cross/drop-bar bike.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Light Bicycle Carbon Rims-capture.jpg  

    Geologist by trade...bicycle mechanic (former) by the grace of God!

    2012 Specialized Stumpy EVO 29 HT

  37. #537
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    128
    Well, its all your fault. Just read through all 6 pages of this thread.

    Just ordered two AM733 wheels for my Intense Tracer 275A. How did LB know I wanted Onyx hubs? All this, and the only thing I really needed was an XD freehub for my new cassette. Man! You guys really know how to lighten my wallet.

  38. #538
    mtbr member
    Reputation: baltobrewer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by light bicycle View Post
    We do not sell our rims to trading companies in China which is what happens with many Chinese manufacturers. Quite a few years ago we sold some rims to other companies in China, but the problem was that you lose control over the customer experience and how the other company represents you (if they represent you at all). So we decided to not sell to any trading companies.

    There are a lot of carbon rim manufacturers in China, but there are even more trading companies and it's traditionally the trading companies that become more prominent. That is what leads to so much confusion about what you are even buying as they may private label rims from several suppliers.

    When you buy a Light Bicycle rim, it is coming from us directly. We were early adopters in the direct to consumer approach and have a stronger website than some competitors. So we often find our pictures and information on others websites (even though we do not sell to them). More confusion ensues...

    The direct to consumer model was originally developed because we needed more feedback from riders on what we should make. We were starting out and didn't have big bike companies to produce rims for. We thought if some big bike companies heard about us through consumers, they might consider using us as a manufacturer. After a few years though, we were able to get enough end-consumer orders that we became stabilized and didn't need to rely on a big bike company to help us grow.

    We do produce some rims for other smaller brands and most of which own their molds at the factory and aid in the development to make their products unique. Naturally we cannot disclose any of that information beyond what I've said.
    This is one of the reasons that I recently pulled the trigger on a full wheelset build from LB (65mm fatty rims, DT Swiss Big ride hubs, etc.). I like the fact that these wheels are made to order, in house, by the same people who oversee the process from start to finish. Paid just over $1K shipped to my house halfway around the world. The rims are in sanding now, so should ship out within a few days, but so far, communication, response time, and overall sales process/buying experience has been second to none. I'll chime in here when they arrive to let you know, but honestly, I can't see getting any better customer service from a company. Now that they have a true US presence, I think things will only improve. Just me .02.

    Jay

  39. #539
    I like turtles
    Reputation: TiGeo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    5,947
    ^^^Good customer service = happy customers = more customers = business grows. Not rocket science.
    Geologist by trade...bicycle mechanic (former) by the grace of God!

    2012 Specialized Stumpy EVO 29 HT

  40. #540
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    128
    HA! Placed an order with Light Bicycle last week (Wed evening). The next morning, June 1, I received an email with a delivery date of 6/7.

    Got them this morning (6/7). Exactly as ordered. Onyx hubs, Sapim spokes, XD driver, 6 bolt, all perfect. Two beautiful AM733 wheels.

    How about that. Order, build, and deliver approx. 2000 miles away (coast of California) in less than 7 complete days.

    These guys have it together!

  41. #541
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    356
    tldr.

    dunno what that thing with inertiaman above is, but i i like the fact that a company is here on the forum answering questions. i've seen that on some other (non-cycling) forums and hope the trend continues because it's a great way to build a line of communication. i'll admit to carbon snobbery. i just don't want any doubt when it comes to trusting my wheels, but i'll be strongly considering the lb rims for an upcoming build.

    one question tho, will you rebuild a set of hubs i have here? or do i have to order the rims and give to a local builder?

  42. #542
    mtbr member
    Reputation: baltobrewer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    225
    So, update: the wheels arrived a few days ago. Box had nary a ding, wheels were packed a little less tightly than I'd have liked (no stabilizing polystyrene end caps), but they arrived damage free and look tremendous. They are both true to the millimeter both laterally and vertically. I don't have a spoke tensionometer, so I can't verify that, but if they last like they look, we are in good shape. Specs: 65mm fatbike rims, DT Swiss Big Ride hubs, 150x15 and 177x12, DT Swiss double butted spokes, alloy nips.

    A few pics of unboxing day:

    Light Bicycle Carbon Rims-img_1423.jpg
    Light Bicycle Carbon Rims-img_1425.jpg
    Light Bicycle Carbon Rims-img_1426.jpg
    Light Bicycle Carbon Rims-img_1438.jpg
    Light Bicycle Carbon Rims-img_1427.jpg
    Light Bicycle Carbon Rims-img_1430.jpg
    Light Bicycle Carbon Rims-img_1433.jpg
    Light Bicycle Carbon Rims-img_1436.jpg
    Light Bicycle Carbon Rims-img_1434.jpg
    Light Bicycle Carbon Rims-img_1440.jpg

    Happy camper here.

  43. #543
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,933
    Quote Originally Posted by baltobrewer View Post
    So, update: the wheels arrived a few days ago. Box had nary a ding, wheels were packed a little less tightly than I'd have liked (no stabilizing polystyrene end caps), but they arrived damage free and look tremendous. They are both true to the millimeter both laterally and vertically. I don't have a spoke tensionometer, so I can't verify that, but if they last like they look, we are in good shape. Specs: 65mm fatbike rims, DT Swiss Big Ride hubs, 150x15 and 177x12, DT Swiss double butted spokes, alloy nips.

    A few pics of unboxing day:


    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_1440.jpg 
Views:	145 
Size:	78.1 KB 
ID:	1142355

    Happy camper here.
    Nice, you got me beat by a few grams, although the 1up hope mini-driver was a few grams heavier than the DT freehub. I also have a set of 90mms, they are about 200g heavier, those rims came out at about 660g ea. Here's the 65 though:
    Light Bicycle Carbon Rims-16832406_10101056009286118_7269716387457239928_n.jpg
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  44. #544
    www.lightbicycle.com
    Reputation: light bicycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by vqdriver View Post
    tldr.

    dunno what that thing with inertiaman above is, but i i like the fact that a company is here on the forum answering questions. i've seen that on some other (non-cycling) forums and hope the trend continues because it's a great way to build a line of communication. i'll admit to carbon snobbery. i just don't want any doubt when it comes to trusting my wheels, but i'll be strongly considering the lb rims for an upcoming build.

    one question tho, will you rebuild a set of hubs i have here? or do i have to order the rims and give to a local builder?
    The Canadian office can handle rebuilding on hubs supplied by customers. Our US office does not handle that currently.
    http://www.lightbicycle.com
    http://www.us.lightbicycle.com (North American site)
    Instagram: @lightbicycle

  45. #545
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    128
    Quote Originally Posted by vqdriver View Post
    tldr.

    dunno what that thing with inertiaman above is, but i i like the fact that a company is here on the forum answering questions. i've seen that on some other (non-cycling) forums and hope the trend continues because it's a great way to build a line of communication. i'll admit to carbon snobbery. i just don't want any doubt when it comes to trusting my wheels, but i'll be strongly considering the lb rims for an upcoming build.

    one question tho, will you rebuild a set of hubs i have here? or do i have to order the rims and give to a local builder?
    These LB wheels are my first CF. Can't give an opinion relative to other brands, but I am 100% sold on these wheels. Now I understand what the term "carbon snobbery" is all about.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Light Bicycle Carbon Rims-lb-wheels.jpg  

    Light Bicycle Carbon Rims-6-11-17-ride.jpg  

    Last edited by grizfish; 06-30-2017 at 07:36 PM.

  46. #546
    West Chester, PA
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    4,145
    Had another surreal moment yesterday with my nearly 4 year old LB rims. On a trail I'd never ridden before, I smacked a small iceberg with both wheels, right in the center of the tread. After my brain processed the double thunk/crack sound, I heard the hiss and felt sealant hitting me. For the first time in 27 years of riding I lost both tires at the exact same moment. The whole way back to the car I was dreading peeling those tires off, but they were fine. Again. Rear wheel had a bontrager rim strip and there was no mark at all, the front wheel was just taped and it just has 2 small nicks in the rim bed.

  47. #547
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,933
    Quote Originally Posted by 92gli View Post
    Had another surreal moment yesterday with my nearly 4 year old LB rims. On a trail I'd never ridden before, I smacked a small iceberg with both wheels, right in the center of the tread. After my brain processed the double thunk/crack sound, I heard the hiss and felt sealant hitting me. For the first time in 27 years of riding I lost both tires at the exact same moment. The whole way back to the car I was dreading peeling those tires off, but they were fine. Again. Rear wheel had a bontrager rim strip and there was no mark at all, the front wheel was just taped and it just has 2 small nicks in the rim bed.
    The one carbon rim I have killed was due to me using too-low pressure (was going to fill the tires before a ride and got lazy) and surely would have killed an aluminum rim and made it un-usable. I had a loud "crack" and I thought maybe I had bottomed my shock hard or something, but looking over my bike I couldn't detect anything out of the ordinary and only felt a little sealant spraying out a few hundred feet later and then I realized I was losing pressure. I was able to throw a tube in and ride 10 miles of downhill back to the car (riding hard), but I know aluminum wouldn't have fared any better. It may bend in overload, but it would have been trashed all the same. Inspect that rim carefully to make sure it isn't cracked. After building up a replacement wheel for a race the next weekend, I ran so much pressure that when I hit a rock dead-center in my tread after the enduro race, it punctured the tire casing, which is something I had never done before. Usually it'd be a pinch or a slash on a sidewall, but I slammed the section so hard and there was nothing else that could give, so punctured the tire dead center. Better that than the rim though! One of my rim-sets that's seen DH racing, been re-laced several times and now been retired to XC is around 4 years old. That's good mileage for me and rims...
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  48. #548
    mtbr member
    Reputation: racebum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    1,074
    are the current posted weights for the RM650BC13 accurate in 27.5? rumors say all kinds of things online. anyone weigh them?

  49. #549
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    21
    Can somebody recommend a 29er LB wheelset for me?

    I've been running Stan's Flow EX (29.9 ext 25.5 int) wheels on my 150mm/130mm carbon Rocky Mountain Instinct for 3 years and I've never dented or had to true them. Looking to reduce weight for Whistler XC racing (which sometimes means we're descending EWS stages). Have a DH bike for the park, but use this bike for everything else from technical XC marathons to full on enduro riding.

    64kg/140lbs, would 28h be suitable for me? Figured I'm on the light side and carbon will be a lot stiffer than I'm riding now and thought this might soften things up a little bit.

    Planning on buying CX-ray spokes and DT240s (possibly 350s) for 15x100 and 12x142 axles. Run 2.35" tires usually, maybe 2.25" at times. Hans Dampf/Nobby Nic now, but sometimes Nobby Nic/Racing Ralph.

    What width would you suggest? 30mm (29C07) or 28mm asymmetric (AM928)? Open to other options.

  50. #550
    Cactus Cuddler
    Reputation: tehllama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    1,760
    I've been running my Instinct 150/130 with LB 30mm IW rims for a while, and I like that setup... but wouldn't recommend those rims. My do-over would be durability with width, I'd get the 38/31.6mm ones for how I ride, but the weight savings with those are pretty much trivial.

    If you are really looking to save weight and don't mind the cost bump, go with the Asym i28's...

    Based on your suggested build, I'd go with that - if you're looking to pony up for 240's, then the weight priority is key, and the Asym design is the newer and improved one.

    Running 2.35" tires, 28mm IW is fine (I ran WTB i29 Asyms prior, and loved it)...

    The only caveats despite how similar my setup is to yours: I'm 105kg, ride in New Mexico, and run 2.4" Minions on there.

  51. #551
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,933
    30IW rims are fine. Depends on how you ride and how heavy you want it to get. Although carbon is light, with the weight so far out there I notice it more with 29er wheels than anything else, which drives the bike up and outside berms/turn-apex. So minimizing this and balancing out traction and tire width is the game. I ran 25IW rims on my Enduro 29er and it worked fine (run them on my 29er XC now). Contrary to the current state of things, we ran rims skinnier than 40mm all the time a few years ago and it wasn't an issue. Wider rims to a certain extent are good, but you go over that line fairly quickly at the 29er wheel-size IME. Strict XC and 25IW is great, it'll handle AM just fine too. If you want to be more targeted towards AM, go 30IW. If you need to run plus tires, you'll be on even wider rims and you will have accepted the hit in maneuverability at speed.

    I put plenty of park days on the 25IW rims and a few DH races, held up great. Relaced them several times and eventually retired to an XC race bike, where they don't get pampered. If I were to build up a "trail" 29er, which I consider your bike to be, I might go 30IW, but my idea would be that it would NOT be an XC bike and NOT intended to go a little faster in the XC races.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  52. #552
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    11

    Order Placed!

    Well, after reading this entire thread I took the plunge and ordered the following for my 2015 Santa Cruz Tallboy LTc:

    XC923 (23mm inside) UD matte
    DT Swiss 240s straight pull w/Shimano MTB 10/11
    Sapim CS Ray, 28 spokes

    I must say that Light Bicycle's posts on this thread take most of the credit for my purchase. I found them all to be informative, extremely well-written, and level headed (even under attack).

    In case anyone is wondering why I'm buying such a light, narrow, and potentially fragile XC wheelset for my long travel Tallboy, I find that as I age, my climbs get higher and my jumps get lower. Santa Cruz's regular travel Tallboy (there is no LT anymore) is perhaps only a quarter pound lighter than mine, if that, so I'm committed to making mine as light as it can possibly be!

    I'll share photos and my experience when the wheels arrive.

  53. #553
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    5
    I've skimmed some of the previous discussion about rim engineering, however can I bring back this discussion down to the level of a potential LB customer (snowbike with rear 177/TA) who is interested to know what are the most important technical considerations that determine the choice of product. I'm choosing between LB 85 mm rim and Nextie Wild Dragon II. The most obvious differences between these are the rim profiles, with the LB's being considerably lower/flatter (22 mm) compared to the Nextie (40 mm), and the spoke offset is quite different (+/-16 mm compared with +/-2.5 mm if I've got those right). The LB rim design seem to be similar to other brands like Whisky No. 9.

    If we ignore all the other engineering choices in a rim design, I am curious to understand what design priorities led to LB deciding on their flatter rim profile and relatively wide spoke placement. Did LB more or less follow an already-established and proven engineering design? Crucially, why would I choose the LB design over the competing Nextie one? Would one be theoretically better suited to certain types of riding or terrain than another? Is the LB design intended to give a more compliant ride compared to one like the Nextie? Is it possible to say that one of these designs is predicted to have better long-term durability under average riding conditions than the other? Again, let's ignore for the moment most of the other possible considerations such as price, warranty, reputation, build quality, weight, ease of tubeless setup, etc.

  54. #554
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    11
    Hi everyone, just to close the loop on my order, the rims arrived to my door 9 days after the order was placed, or 7 business days. I'm not sure if I could have ordered the components and laced them myself much faster than that.

    They arrived 28g heavier than listed (1,422g vs 1,394), but a few grams can probably be attributed to the stickers. They are perfectly true I am quite happy with the weight savings (compared to my WTF Frequency i23 rims) after a few rides.

    Communication with LB after my order was excellent. Would order from them again.

  55. #555
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    26,933
    Quote Originally Posted by oliver37 View Post
    Hi everyone, just to close the loop on my order, the rims arrived to my door 9 days after the order was placed, or 7 business days. I'm not sure if I could have ordered the components and laced them myself much faster than that.

    They arrived 28g heavier than listed (1,422g vs 1,394), but a few grams can probably be attributed to the stickers. They are perfectly true I am quite happy with the weight savings (compared to my WTF Frequency i23 rims) after a few rides.

    Communication with LB after my order was excellent. Would order from them again.
    Let us know how they feel on the bike!
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  56. #556
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem View Post
    Let us know how they feel on the bike!
    This is my first set of carbon rims (I've barely skipped the Enve option on both of my last two Tallboy builds), so I have only an aluminum set to compare to. My aluminum rims are exactly the same dimensions. The variable here is tires - I switched from a Knobby Nic front / Rock Razor rear to a Specialized Renegade on both of the LB wheels, which is a thinner and more supple tire.

    From a handling perspective, I think I can feel the suspension moving more and the wheel/tire deflecting less. A metaphor would be looking at my suspension through a dirty window versus a clean window - there is less "noise" and I have a clearer picture of what the bike is doing. The ride is a little busier, as you can feel more going on through the saddle and bars, but not harsh.

    All of this could be attributed to the tire change or the wheels, or both. I don't want to get into an argument about carbon rim flex

    A very large change that I am certain about is the overall reduction in weight. This upgrade resulted in a nearly 2lb (902g) reduction in rotating mass, most of it very far from the axles, and the corresponding improvement in acceleration is quite noticeable.

    There is a gentle uphill Strava segment that I have ridden nearly 200+ times, made up of a sprint from 5mph to top speed with two 90 degree corners, t/and no matter what I've tried over the last few months I have not been able to beat 35 seconds through it. My first time through with the new wheels and tires, while putting out roughly a 9/10 effort, was 32 seconds. A recent ~25 minute time-to-climb segment came in over two minutes faster than my previous best, as well as a few others, so I think it's safe to say that this setup is a solid 10% faster where acceleration is involved.

    So to sum up, the wheels are lighter which was what I was going for, and they do feel like they move around less while cornering than my old setup.

  57. #557
    mtbr member
    Reputation: SikeMo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    200
    Is there any consensus as to which valve stems work best with asymmetric rims?

  58. #558
    www.lightbicycle.com
    Reputation: light bicycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    182

    Tubeless Valves on asymmetric rims

    Quote Originally Posted by SikeMo View Post
    Is there any consensus as to which valve stems work best with asymmetric rims?
    We have tubeless valves in stock at our Chinese, American and Canadian warehouses which work well with the asymmetric rims. You can reach out to the appropriate location if you like the look of these. They are anodized black and are alloy so they are lightweight as well. This design has 3 key features:

    1. Oversized collar allows you to tighten by hand much easier
    2. The collar is concave on one side so it contains the O-ring.
    3. The rubber O-ring will swell up under the collar once you tighten it down and it stabilizes the valve stem and seals the hole.

    Light Bicycle Carbon Rims-valve-pic.jpgLight Bicycle Carbon Rims-valve-3.jpgLight Bicycle Carbon Rims-valve-2.jpg
    http://www.lightbicycle.com
    http://www.us.lightbicycle.com (North American site)
    Instagram: @lightbicycle

  59. #559
    www.lightbicycle.com
    Reputation: light bicycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by PositiveIon View Post
    I've skimmed some of the previous discussion about rim engineering, however can I bring back this discussion down to the level of a potential LB customer (snowbike with rear 177/TA) who is interested to know what are the most important technical considerations that determine the choice of product. I'm choosing between LB 85 mm rim and Nextie Wild Dragon II. The most obvious differences between these are the rim profiles, with the LB's being considerably lower/flatter (22 mm) compared to the Nextie (40 mm), and the spoke offset is quite different (+/-16 mm compared with +/-2.5 mm if I've got those right). The LB rim design seem to be similar to other brands like Whisky No. 9.

    If we ignore all the other engineering choices in a rim design, I am curious to understand what design priorities led to LB deciding on their flatter rim profile and relatively wide spoke placement. Did LB more or less follow an already-established and proven engineering design? Crucially, why would I choose the LB design over the competing Nextie one? Would one be theoretically better suited to certain types of riding or terrain than another? Is the LB design intended to give a more compliant ride compared to one like the Nextie? Is it possible to say that one of these designs is predicted to have better long-term durability under average riding conditions than the other? Again, let's ignore for the moment most of the other possible considerations such as price, warranty, reputation, build quality, weight, ease of tubeless setup, etc.
    Hello,

    A few positives/differences to note about the lower profile design:

    1. We can have a wider array of drilling options to better suit the width of the hubs.

    2. Less prone to rock strikes. The sidewalls on double wall rims are the thinnest part of the system, so a very wide and deep rim has a lot of exposure to getting hit by a sharp edged rock and causing damage.

    3. The more obvious physical aspect of the rims would be that they do not ride as stiff as a deeper rim, and that they are lighter.

    22mm is about the lowest we can go to maximize the characteristics above while still being able to produce the rim with the removable air bladder.
    http://www.lightbicycle.com
    http://www.us.lightbicycle.com (North American site)
    Instagram: @lightbicycle

  60. #560
    mtbr member
    Reputation: SikeMo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    200
    Thanks for that. What is the length of the valve?

  61. #561
    I like turtles
    Reputation: TiGeo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    5,947
    Regular Stan's valve stems worked fine with my XC923 asym rims.
    Geologist by trade...bicycle mechanic (former) by the grace of God!

    2012 Specialized Stumpy EVO 29 HT

  62. #562
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,103
    Quote Originally Posted by TiGeo View Post
    Regular Stan's valve stems worked fine with my XC923 asym rims.
    I would only use Stans metal valves, the alloy are not worth the weight savings in my opinion. I have 7 sets on carbon rims, 2 with alloy valves. If your the trail and are rushing to get back on your group ride using a pump that your not familiar with you can break the alloy valve, and that sucks!!

    I really like the New Graphics, when will they be available Light Bicycles?

  63. #563
    mtbr member
    Reputation: macming's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    1,995
    Quote Originally Posted by dgw7000 View Post
    I would only use Stans metal valves, the alloy are not worth the weight savings in my opinion. I have 7 sets on carbon rims, 2 with alloy valves. If your the trail and are rushing to get back on your group ride using a pump that your not familiar with you can break the alloy valve, and that sucks!!

    I really like the New Graphics, when will they be available Light Bicycles?
    I have a set of LB valves on my roadbike and they are pretty flimsy. I will swap them out for Stan's valves for my next tire change.

  64. #564
    I like turtles
    Reputation: TiGeo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    5,947
    Yes, I always use the standard non-alloy Stan's valves with no issues on all of my tubeless setups.
    Geologist by trade...bicycle mechanic (former) by the grace of God!

    2012 Specialized Stumpy EVO 29 HT

  65. #565
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Radical_53's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    505
    I'm using tune aluminum valves and they're perfectly fine (half the weight of Stan's valve plus long enough for these rims).

  66. #566
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    31
    I need a recommendation for a wheel set. I'm looking for lightweight set to live on my hardtail that will be used for endurance races of 40 miles and up as well as gravel training rides. It will also get swapped onto my 4.5 for some of the rougher endurance races that are a little too rocky for the HT. I'm a middle weight at 165lb, haven't had problems with wheel damage in the past, but do live in a rocky area. I'm currently thinking about going with either the 23interal width or 24internal width 29er rim with 28 spokes front and rear. Thoughts?

  67. #567
    www.lightbicycle.com
    Reputation: light bicycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by SikeMo View Post
    Thanks for that. What is the length of the valve?
    35mm and 44mm are in stock at the US and Canada warehouse, the Chinese location has many sizes in stock.

    Rims Depth Recommended Tubeless Valves Length
    under 26mm 35mm
    27mm~34mm 44mm
    35mm~40mm 55mm
    45mm~49mm 60mm
    50mm~55mm 70mm
    60mm~65mm 90mm
    80mm~90mm 110mm
    http://www.lightbicycle.com
    http://www.us.lightbicycle.com (North American site)
    Instagram: @lightbicycle

  68. #568
    www.lightbicycle.com
    Reputation: light bicycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by dgw7000 View Post
    I would only use Stans metal valves, the alloy are not worth the weight savings in my opinion. I have 7 sets on carbon rims, 2 with alloy valves. If your the trail and are rushing to get back on your group ride using a pump that your not familiar with you can break the alloy valve, and that sucks!!

    I really like the New Graphics, when will they be available Light Bicycles?
    I have only seen the alloy valve break when it was smashed into with a rock or stick from the trail. I have been running alloy for years and have not had any issues.

    Which graphics were you looking for? The road waterslide graphics?
    Light Bicycle Carbon Rims-229.jpg
    Light Bicycle Carbon Rims-jl_-310.jpg
    http://www.lightbicycle.com
    http://www.us.lightbicycle.com (North American site)
    Instagram: @lightbicycle

  69. #569
    www.lightbicycle.com
    Reputation: light bicycle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    182
    Quote Originally Posted by dgregorie View Post
    I need a recommendation for a wheel set. I'm looking for lightweight set to live on my hardtail that will be used for endurance races of 40 miles and up as well as gravel training rides. It will also get swapped onto my 4.5 for some of the rougher endurance races that are a little too rocky for the HT. I'm a middle weight at 165lb, haven't had problems with wheel damage in the past, but do live in a rocky area. I'm currently thinking about going with either the 23interal width or 24internal width 29er rim with 28 spokes front and rear. Thoughts?
    We have 4 different rims you could look at.

    Inner width//Outer Width//Height

    22//27//24 - RM29C06 - 280g (Flyweight version)
    22//27//24 - RM29C06 - 360g (Standard version)
    23//28//23 - XC923 - 370g
    24//30//25 - RM29C19 - 395g

    I've ridden all 4 and for racing I prefer the flyweights for racing as they are just ridiculously light and have taken their share of abuse with no issues. I just did 50 miles and over 3,400 meters of climbing very hard trails yesterday. I was definitely appreciating their low weight in the final hours of the day... The regular version is quite a bit cheaper but it adds more weight so at that point I'd go with the RM29C19's instead. These will suit the 4.5c better as it's an all around trail rim which is wider and stiffer than the other rims listed. I have the luxury of using the flyweights for big days and then I throw on some wider wheels and proper 2.3 Minions for trail duty. The XC923's split the difference in width and won't ride quite as stiff which could be desirable on the hard tail depending on your preferences.

    So if you care the most about racing the most, go with the lightest option. If you want to have the most fun and still be able to have a race worth wheel go with the RM29C19's. If you are on the fence with either of those description the XC923's won't disappoint.

    On my builds I tend to stick with 32h as the rotational weight is as low as possible. The production numbers are way higher on 32h and they have more holes in them so the average rim weights are the lightest. You save a bit of weight on spokes but it's minimal unless you are going with brass nipples and heavy gauge spokes (which you won't be so that's not an issue). If you break a spoke during a race on a 32h wheel it won't be a big deal, the trueness will be effected very little. If you want a softer feeling wheel for the hardtail, then perhaps 28h is viable there as it will help a bit, but I wouldn't rely on it as a significant weight savings option.
    http://www.lightbicycle.com
    http://www.us.lightbicycle.com (North American site)
    Instagram: @lightbicycle

  70. #570
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    31
    Thanks for the info. What size tires are you running on the flyweights? I have a set of heavy duty wheels that I run with Minions when I'm hammering on the 4.5c but one of the things I love about that bike is that all I really have to change is the wheels and it's pretty good for longer xc races in rough terrain.

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456

Similar Threads

  1. Carbon rims - Derby, Nextie, or Light Bicycle?
    By awai04 in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 85
    Last Post: 06-03-2016, 05:59 AM
  2. My new Light Bicycle 27.5 Hookless carbon rims
    By beachbum1 in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 78
    Last Post: 12-22-2015, 08:41 AM
  3. Light Bicycle carbon rims for Yeti 575
    By Tantrum in forum Yeti
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 11-15-2015, 07:51 PM
  4. Light Bicycle carbon rims leaking at sidewall
    By gozar in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 11-07-2014, 11:01 AM
  5. light bicycle carbon rims width??
    By CyclerDi in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 03-24-2014, 06:51 PM

Members who have read this thread: 694

Posting Permissions

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