ENVE- Industry Nine hubs verses Stans and Industry Nine Straight Pull set up- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 39 of 39
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation: "CHIEF"'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    434

    ENVE- Industry Nine hubs verses Stans and Industry Nine Straight Pull set up

    I am losing sleep on this one. With my limited experiences with 29er wheels, mainly through friends' experiences, I hope to gauge and circumvent potential issues through your well thought out replies.

    Please give me the pros and cons of these two builds of which I am considering for a wheelset to be featured on a 29er custom-built hardtail, FortyFour all-mountain bike.

    ENVE AM rims matched to Industry Nine J-bend hubset. Spokes, whatever ENVE feels is the best.

    ----Versus----

    Stans Rims or Industry Nine branded rims matched to Industry Nine straight-pull spokes and matching hubs.

    My thoughts are lateral strength would be improved by both of these two designs. The wheels should be stiff. The ENVE rims in themselves and through the high tension straight-pull spokes that the I9 wheels feature.

    Cons of the straight-pull: can't be easily repaired out of country or out-of-town unless you carry spares with you. Potenial weak eyelets.

    Cons of ENVE: cost. Can only use j-bend spokes at this time. Industry Nine straight-pull spokes will pull through the carbon. Or so I have been lead to believe.

    I would like to support one of these two USA made brands. Thank you.
    "You can make some of the people happy some of the time, but you can't make all of the people happy all of the time."

  2. #2
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,307
    gonna be hard to beat the ENVE rims for stiffness and strength.
    the I9 straight pull wheels do not use particularly high tension, and I'm not sure where the idea that they are stiff comes from, except maybe trail reports, which are heavily influenced by the aluminum construction.
    straight pull generally requires narrower effective flange spacing due to the large chunks of aluminum required to support them at the hub. narrower spacing = lower lateral stiffness.
    the aluminum spokes themselves are also not particularly stiff, being about the same as a DT Swiss Comp. also, spokes make relatively little difference in lateral stiffness compared to flange spacing.
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  3. #3
    ~~~
    Reputation: tburger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,036
    Quote Originally Posted by "CHIEF" View Post
    Cons of the straight-pull: can't be easily repaired out of country or out-of-town unless you carry spares with you. Potenial weak eyelets.
    This is a HUGE con, IMO. If you do travel with your bike, don't get proprietary spokes. It doesn't sound like a big deal, but when it happens to you, it's a big deal. I've broken Crank Brothers spokes on a trip, and my buddy has broken I9 spokes on a trip. I didn't plan ahead and buy spare spokes, so I had to buy a spare wheel while in Moab.

    My buddy's I9 spoke broke right at the threads, and he couldn't get the threaded bit out of the hub. He brought spare spokes, but it did him no good. HOWEVER, this story is also a testament for I9 wheels. It was a lost cause, so he trued the wheel the best he could, and rode it for the rest of the weekend. At Northstar. First run, we expected the wheel to at least be out of true. By another couple of runs, he was taking jumps again. Wheel held up just fine. After that trip, he switched to I9 the classic hub with stainless spokes.

    I strongly believe the aluminum spokes are blingy and pretty, but really not worth the hassle. My vote is for Enve rims, stainless spokes, and whatever hub you want. It'll be bombproof and light.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    508
    I always lean toward standard spoke vs straight pull for simple availability and ease of repair... and I lean heavily toward standard spokes over a proprietary aluminum spoke that threads into the hub like I9 does. I'd be afraid that one of the spokes would snap off at the hub and a spoke end stuck down in the bore.

    Other than that... ENVE.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skiahh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,959
    How about Enve with Project 321 hubs? They use I9 innards in the rear hub, but j-bend spokes (Sapim CX Ray) configuration.

  6. #6
    Category Winner
    Reputation: teamdicky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,050
    Couple of corrections here.

    When/if a spoke breaks at the hub, there is a place for a small allen in the threaded bit so it can be extracted.

    2:38 in the video

    <iframe title="Industry Nine Factory Tour - Part Two" width="400" height="250" src="http://bigbikesmedia.cyclingdirt.org/embed/ODcyNjIxNzMz?related=1" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe><p><a href="http://bigbikesmedia.cyclingdirt.org/speaker/3349-Thom-Parsons">Watch more video of Thom Parsons on thom.cyclingdirt.org</a></p>

    Also, you get four free spokes with the set, and I never travel without them. I've never needed them, but you never know.

    You mentioned this:

    "Stans Rims or Industry Nine branded rims matched to..."

    AFAIK they do not have any 29'er I9 branded rims.

    and this:

    "Industry Nine straight-pull spokes will pull through the carbon. Or so I have been lead to believe."

    I9 spokes are not compatible with ENVE rims since the nipple is internal, and the hole is too small for the thicker spokes.
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Last edited by teamdicky; 03-21-2012 at 12:49 PM.
    WWW.TEAMDICKY.COM

    I get paid 3 every time I post on MTBR.

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    673
    I like the I9 hubs both with there spokes and with Dt comps. I currently have a pair of their J bend hubs with flows and I feel like the steel spoke wheel is stiffer overall, while the aluminum spoked hub with flows was certainly lighter.

    I think their spokes shaved about 120 grams off the wheelset.

    No harm if one brakes, because you can extract it with a 1.5 allen. This was tricky the last time I did it, because of the small size tool involved.

    My only reason for going steel spoke was cost. I already had plenty of spokes, and it is significantly more expensive to buy the aluminum.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails ENVE- Industry Nine hubs verses Stans and Industry Nine Straight Pull set up-2012-03-06-13.17.15.jpg  


  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    508
    Quote Originally Posted by teamdicky View Post
    Couple of corrections here.

    When/if a spoke breaks at the hub, there is a place for a small allen in the threaded bit so it can be extracted.
    Didn't know that... cool. I still like traditional spokes better. Easier to find just incase you ever do need to replace one.

  9. #9
    ~~~
    Reputation: tburger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,036
    Quote Originally Posted by teamdicky View Post
    Couple of corrections here.

    When/if a spoke breaks at the hub, there is a place for a small allen in the threaded bit so it can be extracted.
    It can be extracted, but not always easily. If the threaded part seizes up a bit, which it did in my friend's case, it's pretty much impossible to extract with a tiny allen wrench without stripping the aluminum.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: "CHIEF"'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    434

    Stiffy

    Dicky, you are right. The straight-pull spokes will not fit through the ENVE rim. With that being said, I have been also told that currently I9 does not stand behind a carbon rim (period) matched to their straight-pull spokes. And with that being also said, there are few USA carbon rim manufacturers even if I was willing to take a chance.

    Like you, I have several I9 wheels including perhaps their first prototype. I love them. Looks, engagement, weight. I have broken more spokes than any other wheels but have always been well taken care of by their customer service. I have snapped two and probably bent three spokes in total and NEVER have had it affect the true of the build. I probably have a couple bent ones rolling now. I know that I have one. I saw it two nights ago....

    They can be removed with a hex key. You do have to be careful to not strip it from behind I suppose. Makes sense.

    They are stiff and sexy, just like how Dicky likes his riding partners. Usually they're behind him. For what it's worth.

    So the million dollar questions are, which set up is lighter? "Stronger?" And less likely to go out of true when built up by an expert craftsman?
    "You can make some of the people happy some of the time, but you can't make all of the people happy all of the time."

  11. #11
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,307
    Is it me or has I9's website been hacked?
    I was looking for weights because I seriously doubt the 120g-savings claim but keep getting redirected to strange URLs that trigger security software.
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  12. #12
    Category Winner
    Reputation: teamdicky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,050
    Quote Originally Posted by "CHIEF" View Post
    Dicky, you are right. The straight-pull spokes will not fit through the ENVE rim. With that being said, I have been also told that currently I9 does not stand behind a carbon rim (period) matched to their straight-pull spokes. And with that being also said, there are few USA carbon rim manufacturers even if I was willing to take a chance.
    I went down the carbon rim road discussion before I got my last set of I9's. Reynolds doesn't make one with enough holes, and as said before, the ENVE's were a no-go. The only option was to buy a set of Rovals and steal the rims or buy the Chinese carbon rims from the "Cheap Carbon Rim" thread. I just wasn't going either route. Too many issues popping up with the cheap option and couldn't justify the added hassle with the Rovals. I9 woulda built up either rim had I bought it myself.

    I went with Stan's since they've been great for me since 2007.

    I can't answer your last question. I just know what's worked for me.
    WWW.TEAMDICKY.COM

    I get paid 3 every time I post on MTBR.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skiahh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    3,959
    Quote Originally Posted by meltingfeather View Post
    Is it me or has I9's website been hacked?
    I was looking for weights because I seriously doubt the 120g-savings claim but keep getting redirected to strange URLs that trigger security software.
    Looks like something got by your security software already because the I9 site works fine for me.

  14. #14
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,307
    Quote Originally Posted by skiahh View Post
    Looks like something got by your security software already because the I9 site works fine for me.
    Weird. It happened on two different machines, IPs, OSs, etc.
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  15. #15
    change is good
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    2,828
    When my I9 spoke broke my wheel went out of true twice. One time I had to walk out. I am a clyde however, but I'm not the only one this has happened to. ENVEs are great. My 240s/Aerolite/AM ENVE wheel set is noticeably lighter and stiffer than my I9s and the I9s are a sweet wheel set. Broken spoke - only one with close to three years of use and it didn't go out of true. Cost vs benefit - ENVE if you are heavy or if you have deep pockets. I run Flows on my SS. For that bike and its usage I can't justify the additional cost.

  16. #16
    ~~~
    Reputation: tburger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,036
    If comparing the two by ride quality, I would be very surprised if you could notice the difference in weight or stiffness. Given that you are fully aware of the drawbacks of the I9 spokes, and that you're experienced with them, I say go with the wheel build that will make your bike look the best! I just read through your bike build thread, and it sounds like your bike will be awesome. teamdicky's ByStickel with the pink I9 wheels is a great example of how creative you can get with your custom build.

  17. #17
    jms
    jms is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    3,229

    I have both

    I have a five year old set of I9/Arches that has held up well. I've never broken a spoke and they're still reasonably true. They're easy to service and obviously long lived. A great set of wheels. I've never regretted owning them. The freehub drag is my only gripe with my I9's, even with three pawls, the chain slacks when I'm coasting.

    I have a set of DT190/Edge XC's [pre ENVE] that are three years old. They're in another league from anything else, especially a wheel with an aluminum rim. The Edge's are lighter, stronger, more precise, have lower freehub drag, and durable. I've had to replace a few spokes only because they're light gauge and I've etched against boulders or rocks, and that's about the only problems I've had with them. I

    f you can justify the cost, there isn't a better wheel to be had than the Edge/Enves with your choice of hubs, especially if you're racing. If you can't, the I9/Arch is a great choice.

    My two cents.
    My Favorite Peeps:

  18. #18
    Category Winner
    Reputation: teamdicky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,050
    Quote Originally Posted by jms View Post
    I have a five year old set of I9/Arches that has held up well. I've never broken a spoke and they're still reasonably true. They're easy to service and obviously long lived. A great set of wheels. I've never regretted owning them. The freehub drag is my only gripe with my I9's, even with three pawls, the chain slacks when I'm coasting.
    Just out of curiosity, have you changed the large bearing behind the freehub? It could be the source of some of the drag. Cleaned, lubed and with a fresh bearing (even with six pawls), the drag shouldn't be so bad.
    WWW.TEAMDICKY.COM

    I get paid 3 every time I post on MTBR.

  19. #19
    jms
    jms is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    3,229

    Thanks

    Quote Originally Posted by teamdicky View Post
    Just out of curiosity, have you changed the large bearing behind the freehub? It could be the source of some of the drag. Cleaned, lubed and with a fresh bearing (even with six pawls), the drag shouldn't be so bad.
    I have cleaned and lubed it, but I haven't replaced that bearing. Thanks for the tip Rich, I'll look in to doing that.
    My Favorite Peeps:

  20. #20
    Category Winner
    Reputation: teamdicky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,050
    Quote Originally Posted by jms View Post
    I have cleaned and lubed it, but I haven't replaced that bearing. Thanks for the tip Rich, I'll look in to doing that.
    It's not too difficult to swap or expensive (as long as you don't get ceramic... which does spin nicely).

    INDUSTRY NINE : : : - manuals

    If you're comfortable servicing your own hubs, you should be able to do the swap yourself. It's easy to check the bearing when you have the freehub out for servicing.
    WWW.TEAMDICKY.COM

    I get paid 3 every time I post on MTBR.

  21. #21
    Always Learning
    Reputation: BruceBrown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    9,606
    Quote Originally Posted by tburger View Post
    It can be extracted, but not always easily. If the threaded part seizes up a bit, which it did in my friend's case, it's pretty much impossible to extract with a tiny allen wrench without stripping the aluminum.
    Been there, done that. Requires the wheel to be sent back to I9 for proper extraction - or at least mine was based on my telephone conversation with I9 so that I wouldn't damage the hub trying alternative methods to extract the spoke.

    I've got the Enduro wheels with the Flow rims. To date, at least 4 or 5 spokes have broken, but only one seized in the hub. The rest I have changed myself without any problems.

    BB

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    205
    I thought one of the selling points of the I9 spoke system was its stiffness, but it sounds like most on here are saying its not really noticeable ? I have also been interested in the weight change, this is the first time I have heard the 120g number, although it did seem that their wheelsets are fairly light overall. So I guess my questions would be

    1) Do I9 owners feel a noticeable difference in wheel stiffness from steel spokes, jbend or otherwise ?

    2) what is the weight of the aluminum spoke vs a steel spoke/aluminum nipple in the same length ?

    I'm considering an I9 system for my chinese carbon rims, but only if there is a performance difference. There is obviuosly a significant cost difference from steel spokes/cheaper hubs.
    I already have a carbon roval set as a benchmark.

  23. #23
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,307
    Quote Originally Posted by Preston View Post
    2) what is the weight of the aluminum spoke vs a steel spoke/aluminum nipple in the same length ?
    I9 has different spokes, but if you compare the 0.100" (2.54mm) spokes on the cross country wheelset to a DT Swiss Comp, there is twice as much aluminum as there is steel in the center section (ignoring the ends and assuming they're comparable).
    Aluminum is about 1/3 the density of steel, so the aluminum would weigh about 2/3 of what the steel would. Considering that a set of 64 Comps in 29er length weigh about 360g, it would make sense that the savings could be 120g off a wheelset. It surprised me a bit, but the numbers don't lie. The reason it surprised me is my knowledge of materials and the following:
    The stiffness-to-weight of steel and aluminum is nearly identical for tensile applications, which means that the I9 spokes are going to be more elastic than the Comps. So the weight savings come at a stiffness cost, which is not atypical.
    One major difference is that aluminum is much more susceptible to fatigue than steel, and would be expected under the above-described design conditions to have a shorter design life, which fits with the anecdotes, both online and real world, of people breaking I9 spokes more frequently than steel. I don't think I know personally anyone who has ridden I9 wheels that hasn't broken a spoke. I9's customer service is tops and they take care of you graciously and quickly, so for most people I know it's a non-issue.
    It can be a pain if you're in a remote location without back-ups or have the seizing issues some do.
    Lateral stiffness is also afected in a big way by flange spacing (or effective flange spacing in the case of a straight pull hub like the I9 wheelsets). Generally, straight pull hubs have narrower effective flange spacing because of the large chunks of aluminum required to support the spokes and the same clearance limits set by cassette/derailleur and reasonable dish. So, all else equal (which rarely, if ever, happens), a straight pull hub will build a wheel that is less stiff laterally, generally speaking.
    Quote Originally Posted by Preston View Post
    I'm considering an I9 system for my chinese carbon rims, but only if there is a performance difference. There is obviuosly a significant cost difference from steel spokes/cheaper hubs.
    I already have a carbon roval set as a benchmark.
    Carbon rims seem to drive stiffness and strength more than spoke choice.
    Last edited by meltingfeather; 03-23-2012 at 11:53 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    205
    Good analysis. I fabricate race cars as a hobby and have often contemplated the aluminum vs steel dilmena myself using the same criteria you mentioned. OFten I find myself going with steel explicitly for the fatigue life as the weight difference is not that pronounced, I don't want to crash because I saved 3 lbs on a 3000 lb car, and I don't know what my future maintenance/inspection/life-out program might be.

    People consistently say the I9 are stiff wheels, which could be a very subjective analysis after spending $1k+ on a wheelset.

    I know on simple assemblies we usually consider a flat aluminum plate to be "stiff enough" once it is twice as thick as its steel counterpart, whatever the actual numbers say. You touched on it a bit, but the I9 spoke being thicker means its stiffness is increasing geometrically over its much thinner steel counterpart. A 5mm thick I9 spoke then could be considerably stiffer than a 2mm or smaller steel spoke despite material differences, although whether that remains true in tension/compression vs bending is getting outside my knowledge.

    In this case I am less interested in what engineering will tell me as what a rider will tell me. I'm only interested in paying that kind of money if I can tell the difference subjectively, not because a computerized lap simulator says it will be 5 seconds quicker on 1 hour race.Thanks for the detailed reply, I"m always happy when people bring real tech to the table.

    I'm glad you mentioned fatigue life as it does seem that I9 owners do talk quite a bit about spokes breaking over time. That's an important consideration. As is, of course, having a wheel consisting of brightly colored anodized parts !

  25. #25
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,307
    Quote Originally Posted by Preston View Post
    I know on simple assemblies we usually consider a flat aluminum plate to be "stiff enough" once it is twice as thick as its steel counterpart, whatever the actual numbers say. You touched on it a bit, but the I9 spoke being thicker means its stiffness is increasing geometrically over its much thinner steel counterpart. A 5mm thick I9 spoke then could be considerably stiffer than a 2mm or smaller steel spoke despite material differences,
    The cross-sectional area is what matters, which accounts for the geometric effect of radius.
    Quote Originally Posted by Preston View Post
    although whether that remains true in tension/compression vs bending is getting outside my knowledge.
    Yep... things change. What I said is true for tensile applications, as I mentioned.

    Quote Originally Posted by Preston View Post
    In this case I am less interested in what engineering will tell me as what a rider will tell me.
    Quote Originally Posted by Preston View Post
    People consistently say the I9 are stiff wheels, which could be a very subjective analysis after spending $1k+ on a wheelset.
    Sounds like you have your answer.

    Quote Originally Posted by Preston View Post
    I'm only interested in paying that kind of money if I can tell the difference subjectively, not because a computerized lap simulator says it will be 5 seconds quicker on 1 hour race.
    How can somebody else tell you what your subjective experience is going to be?
    Maybe by hearing it enough times you'll have the confirmation bias to believe it when you ride them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Preston View Post
    As is, of course, having a wheel consisting of brightly colored anodized parts !
    of course!
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  26. #26
    Keep on Rockin...
    Reputation: Miker J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    6,151
    Latterally stiff carbon wheels?

    I hear folks talking about how latterally stiff carbon wheels are on the trail. Can someone please explain to me how this can be? Latteral stiffness, from my understanding comes _almost_ completely from the counter action of the spoke opposing the latteral "deflection" of the rim.

    Assuming we are using high quality components, of appropriate strength for the application, my understanding is that a wheel's latteral stiffness is almost entirely contingent on flange width, and to a much lesser degree flange height.

    I'd agrue that a carbon rim's affect on a wheel's latteral stiffness is a fart in a windstorm proposition compared to the affect of a wide flanged, dishless wheel build.

    It is sad as an economical, simple solution to much of our wheel building woes has existed for a long time: the 150mm dishless rear wheel. Mountainbikers have been forced to adopt archaic, inappropriate, road biking technology and standards. Instead of applying rudimentary engineering tactics, that is, adopting a dishless wheel standard, we are using costly, inferior, "work arounds", to address an inherenetly flawed design - the dished wheel.

  27. #27
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,307
    Quote Originally Posted by Miker J View Post
    Latterally stiff carbon wheels?

    I hear folks talking about how latterally stiff carbon wheels are on the trail. Can someone please explain to me how this can be? Latteral stiffness, from my understanding comes _almost_ completely from the counter action of the spoke opposing the latteral "deflection" of the rim.

    Assuming we are using high quality components, of appropriate strength for the application, my understanding is that a wheel's latteral stiffness is almost entirely contingent on flange width, and to a much lesser degree flange height.

    I'd agrue that a carbon rim's affect on a wheel's latteral stiffness is a fart in a windstorm proposition compared to the affect of a wide flanged, dishless wheel build.

    It is sad as an economical, simple solution to much of our wheel building woes has existed for a long time: the 150mm dishless rear wheel. Mountainbikers have been forced to adopt archaic, inappropriate, road biking technology and standards. Instead of applying rudimentary engineering tactics, that is, adopting a dishless wheel standard, we are using costly, inferior, "work arounds", to address an inherenetly flawed design - the dished wheel.
    You speak pretty boldly for someone who doesn't really know what he's talking about. Opinion about axle standards is one thing. Muddling it with misunderstanding of wheel structures turns it to meaningless blathering.
    Rim stiffness plays a critical role in the structural performance of a wheel, including lateral stiffness, for pretty obvious reasons. It determines to what extent loads are shared. You can understand why the same force opposed by two spokes would produce a larger deflection than if opposed by six spokes, right?
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  28. #28
    www.bigrobracing.co.uk
    Reputation: robdeanhove's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    312
    I worthy alternate to your options are the Reynolds 29er XC carbon wheels I would say. A little lighter than the ENVE rims, plenty stiff and a nice wide rim bed.

    They also use J-bend spokes and have externally accessible nipples so super easy to maintain, should it ever be needed. Friends who have used & raced on them haven't had to touch them yet!

    I just got some (see this thread here) for an "ultimate" build on a Tallboy Carbon, and first impressions are very good. They replace a pair of Crest 29ers and my buddy has ridden ENVE (and I'v had a little spin), so I have some reference on the alternative options.

    Enjoy your wheels, they sound like they'll be awesome whichever way you go!

  29. #29
    Keep on Rockin...
    Reputation: Miker J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    6,151

    Really?

    Quote Originally Posted by meltingfeather View Post
    You speak pretty boldly for someone who doesn't really know what he's talking about. Opinion about axle standards is one thing. Muddling it with misunderstanding of wheel structures turns it to meaningless blathering.
    Rim stiffness plays a critical role in the structural performance of a wheel, including lateral stiffness, for pretty obvious reasons. It determines to what extent loads are shared. You can understand why the same force opposed by two spokes would produce a larger deflection than if opposed by six spokes, right?
    There was a hope on my end that someone could have produced a much more stubstantiated response to the longstanding, widely accepted premise that hub flange is the primary determinant in latteral wheel stiffness.

    (Perhaps a little more diligent study on the topic and less knee jerk critisms might be useful.)

    Most certainly carbon rims will likely improve many aspects of a wheel's functionality. I was trying to play devil's advocate (and not to bash carbon rims) and elicite useful responses that could help some of us determine as to whether or not a carbon rim would offer a significant improvement over say, a Flow rim, in the realm of latteral stiffness.

    Seems that carbon wheels are definitely nice, but again to play devil's advocate, really, what major drawback are they addressing that warrants the exorbinant price tag? For me, I was hoping they would address the issue of latteral rigidity - so I was trying to get some _productive_ responses. Actually, I do hope I'm wrong in my presumptions, as that would mean someone's found an alternative way to address the inherently weaker dished wheel.

  30. #30
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,307
    Quote Originally Posted by Miker J View Post
    There was a hope on my end that someone could have produced a much more stubstantiated response to the longstanding, widely accepted premise that hub flange is the primary determinant in latteral wheel stiffness.
    Substantiated like your post?
    If you had laid out why you think what you do, it would have been easier to engage in a constructive dialogue. You just kind of dropped a rant like a steamy fart and sprinkled it with a few technical terms.
    Hub flange spacing is important. I myself have posted that many times here. In fact, I'm probably in the minority of people who post on MTBR who believe that. To say it is "primary" is way too general to mean anything at all. What exactly DO you mean by that?
    Quote Originally Posted by Miker J View Post
    (Perhaps a little more diligent study on the topic and less knee jerk critisms might be useful.)
    I can assure you that I have studied the topic much more diligently than you have, and while your post isn't as blatantly absurd as many, it is posts like yours, by people with half-understandings who speak in a strange mix of vague generalities (facts) and absolutes (comparisons), that propagate misinformation.
    Quote Originally Posted by Miker J View Post
    Most certainly carbon rims will likely improve many aspects of a wheel's functionality. I was trying to play devil's advocate (and not to bash carbon rims) and elicite useful responses that could help some of us determine as to whether or not a carbon rim would offer a significant improvement over say, a Flow rim, in the realm of latteral stiffness.
    I'm sure useful discussion can be had... I just took your post as more a rant against 135mm axles with a few ideas about wheel structure tossed in, seemingly only in the interest of the anti-135 agenda. My apologies if I misunderstood your post.
    Quote Originally Posted by Miker J View Post
    Seems that carbon wheels are definitely nice, but again to play devil's advocate, really, what major drawback are they addressing that warrants the exorbinant price tag? For me, I was hoping they would address the issue of latteral rigidity - so I was trying to get some _productive_ responses. Actually, I do hope I'm wrong in my presumptions, as that would mean someone's found an alternative way to address the inherently weaker dished wheel.
    I think this question is a dead end. As you have probably read, people who question the value of carbon rims get responses like, "they're incredible, worth every penny, you can't have an opinion until you ride X miles on them," which devolves into useless pissing matches. The fact is that they don't even have to be "worth it" for people to buy and love them.
    I think in general questions about whether pricey components are "worth it" are a complete waste of time, so if that's what you're after, I'll bow out.
    Carbon rims have changed the game a bit, in my opinion. They are so much stiffer than aluminum rims of almost any construction that bike and wheel pros really have no frame of reference for them. That precipitates all kinds of opinions, and like many industries, there are a lot more people talking than know what they're talking about.
    Sorry if I was a bit smart ass... it's in my nature to a certain extent but I think I did point out the major way in which carbon rims affect overall wheel performance. If you want to talk specifically about X wheel build versus Y, that's a different conversation.
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  31. #31
    Keep on Rockin...
    Reputation: Miker J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    6,151

    Thanks....

    Quote Originally Posted by meltingfeather View Post
    Substantiated like your post?
    If you had laid out why you think what you do, it would have been easier to engage in a constructive dialogue. You just kind of dropped a rant like a steamy fart and sprinkled it with a few technical terms.
    Hub flange spacing is important. I myself have posted that many times here. In fact, I'm probably in the minority of people who post on MTBR who believe that. To say it is "primary" is way too general to mean anything at all. What exactly DO you mean by that?

    I can assure you that I have studied the topic much more diligently than you have, and while your post isn't as blatantly absurd as many, it is posts like yours, by people with half-understandings who speak in a strange mix of vague generalities (facts) and absolutes (comparisons), that propagate misinformation.

    I'm sure useful discussion can be had... I just took your post as more a rant against 135mm axles with a few ideas about wheel structure tossed in, seemingly only in the interest of the anti-135 agenda. My apologies if I misunderstood your post.

    I think this question is a dead end. As you have probably read, people who question the value of carbon rims get responses like, "they're incredible, worth every penny, you can't have an opinion until you ride X miles on them," which devolves into useless pissing matches. The fact is that they don't even have to be "worth it" for people to buy and love them.
    I think in general questions about whether pricey components are "worth it" are a complete waste of time, so if that's what you're after, I'll bow out.
    Carbon rims have changed the game a bit, in my opinion. They are so much stiffer than aluminum rims of almost any construction that bike and wheel pros really have no frame of reference for them. That precipitates all kinds of opinions, and like many industries, there are a lot more people talking than know what they're talking about.
    Sorry if I was a bit smart ass... it's in my nature to a certain extent but I think I did point out the major way in which carbon rims affect overall wheel performance. If you want to talk specifically about X wheel build versus Y, that's a different conversation.
    Hearing that these carbon rims are potential game changes from experienced riders is good info.

    When I mentioned flange width as the "primary" factor in determining latteral rigidity it was meant with the "all other things being equal" notion. For example, if someone's interest is in building a more latterally rigid wheel with for example, King hubs, same nips and spokes and, say a Flow rim versus and carbon rim, will someone feel a 'real' difference on the trail? Point is, if I want a latterally more stiff wheel, perhaps I'd be better off saving the $800 on a rim, and instead building up a 150mm rear (which gets somewhat theoretical as that assumes all sorts of things, like having frames available with 150mm spacing).

    I shouldn't be making that much of a fuss over the latteral rigidity issue anyway, but when I hear some folks raving about carbon rims and how phenomenal they are, where specifically is the performance gain coming from as it applies to trail riding? It's not really weight as considered cost per gram saved. It's not vertically compliance, as who's really interested in that. Durability, possibly, but I'm still riding my Stan's 355 for about 4 years on the rear of my SS, under my 180#, and I've yet to kill a Flow. So, that sort of leaves the latteral stiffness factor to consider - as so we come full circle.

    Perhaps the performance gain is coming from a little bit of everything, and for those folks with the spare cash, that's probably enough reason.

    No doubt I've had my eye on that super wide Enve AM rim - and if someone could prove to me it would build up a significantly more rigid wheel I'd be saving my pennies right now.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    931
    Quote Originally Posted by meltingfeather View Post
    You just kind of dropped a rant like a steamy fart and sprinkled it with a few technical terms.
    Lol. I should have used this line while in debate team.

  33. #33
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,307
    Quote Originally Posted by Miker J View Post
    When I mentioned flange width as the "primary" factor in determining latteral rigidity it was meant with the "all other things being equal" notion. For example, if someone's interest is in building a more latterally rigid wheel with for example, King hubs, same nips and spokes and, say a Flow rim versus and carbon rim, will someone feel a 'real' difference on the trail?
    It's impossible to say what people will feel, which is why it's impossible to argue with someone who thinks their C29ssmax wheels are the stiffest in the world. Stiffness is, in my opinion, a relatively minor contributor to the "feel" of a wheel on the trail. Somehow, people have equated wheel feel with stiffness almost across the board, probably for lack of a better explanation. Changing the materials of construction of a wheel change the way it feels, probably (IMO) due to resonant frequency and differences in vibration damping. Humans are actually pretty keen to frequency changes. So if you ride a wheel that has a resonant frequency of middle C and then ride a wheel that's an octave higher, the chances are very good you're going to pick that up. How you interpret it is where things get unpredictable.
    Quote Originally Posted by Miker J View Post
    Point is, if I want a latterally more stiff wheel, perhaps I'd be better off saving the $800 on a rim, and instead building up a 150mm rear
    That might be true... if you had a frame to put it in. There are different approaches to 150mm flange spacing, though. Hope, for example, at least used to have the same distance from flange-to-flange in the 135 vs. 150 of the Pro 2. The 150 was dishless. Worlds stiffer? Hard to say without measuring.
    Quote Originally Posted by Miker J View Post
    (which gets somewhat theoretical as that assumes all sorts of things, like having frames available with 150mm spacing).
    That's what I was going to say, and part of what triggered my initial response. Sure, building a downhill wheelset might be more effective cost-wise to get stiffness, but what happens when you try and put it in your XC frame?
    Quote Originally Posted by Miker J View Post
    I shouldn't be making that much of a fuss over the latteral rigidity issue anyway, but when I hear some folks raving about carbon rims and how phenomenal they are, where specifically is the performance gain coming from as it applies to trail riding? It's not really weight as considered cost per gram saved. It's not vertically compliance, as who's really interested in that. Durability, possibly, but I'm still riding my Stan's 355 for about 4 years on the rear of my SS, under my 180#, and I've yet to kill a Flow. So, that sort of leaves the latteral stiffness factor to consider - as so we come full circle.
    The performance gain from a structural standpoint comes from load sharing. As it applies to the trail? You'll have to listen to a bunch of opinions (worthless) and try to suss that out.
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: WarPigs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    803
    Are there no colourful steel spokes out there?
    Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum

  35. #35
    transmitter~receiver
    Reputation: meltingfeather's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    9,307
    Quote Originally Posted by WarPigs View Post
    Are there no colourful steel spokes out there?
    Sure there are. Powder coated in every color of the rainbow
    Quote Originally Posted by pvd
    Time to stop believing the hype and start doing some science.
    29er Tire Weight Database

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: "CHIEF"'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    434

    Forty Four almost complete build featuring ENVE and I9

    As initally shared through this post, my custom build is about done. I'd thought I'd post a couple of pictures here, mainly for entertainment purposes and maybe help draw your eyes towards a relatively newer builder who does exceptional work. As in, Forty Four Bikes.

    As the build draws to a close I ended up barely, or not really being able to afford, to outfit my bike with an ENVE cockpit. I've gone over that sentence a few times and I think it makes sense. I'm sticking with it. Basically I saved up and outfitted my bike with as much ENVE stuff as possible. I was unable to justify the cost of the rims at this time. I would like to go with carbon rims and wheels from an American company and maybe time passing will allow that to happen.

    Maybe ENVE headquarters will come across my posts and build write-up and recognize that I have a high-quality, eye-candy bike that will have some dirt on it regularly and with fingers crossed, will recognize that I'm a decent person who never wishes harm and perhaps am worthy enough to promote their brand (through my penmanship, involvement in the trail and mountain bike scenes, and my professional social work field, which does very little to reward financially as I continue to realize).

    What I found myself doing due to some variables that did not respond to my influence as I had hoped for, was sticking with a one of fifteen produced, experimental "smoke" colored, Industry Nine, J-bend hubset, matched to Sapim Race spokes and aluminum nipples on Stans Arch EX rims. With the decals removed of course.

    What I can share is that following my observations made in public, there appears to be some new mountain hubs on the horizon produced by I9 that are definitely different than their existing models. Front and back.

    I can also say that I have seen I9 aluminum straight-pull spokes laced to a carbon rim. Now, I cannot verify that it is at all in production. Just that I have seen it. And that it does not appear to be an ENVE rim but maybe a Specialized. But with that information I deemed it a wise decision to just, how do they say?... "Wait and see." And I'm in a holding pattern. Just waiting and a seeing.

    I hope you enjoy these pictures.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails ENVE- Industry Nine hubs verses Stans and Industry Nine Straight Pull set up-dsc_2960.jpg  

    ENVE- Industry Nine hubs verses Stans and Industry Nine Straight Pull set up-dsc_2967.jpg  

    ENVE- Industry Nine hubs verses Stans and Industry Nine Straight Pull set up-dsc_2971.jpg  

    ENVE- Industry Nine hubs verses Stans and Industry Nine Straight Pull set up-dsc_2973.jpg  

    ENVE- Industry Nine hubs verses Stans and Industry Nine Straight Pull set up-dsc_2976.jpg  

    ENVE- Industry Nine hubs verses Stans and Industry Nine Straight Pull set up-dsc_2996.jpg  

    ENVE- Industry Nine hubs verses Stans and Industry Nine Straight Pull set up-dsc_2985.jpg  

    ENVE- Industry Nine hubs verses Stans and Industry Nine Straight Pull set up-dsc_2986.jpg  

    ENVE- Industry Nine hubs verses Stans and Industry Nine Straight Pull set up-dsc_2989.jpg  

    "You can make some of the people happy some of the time, but you can't make all of the people happy all of the time."

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: "CHIEF"'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    434

    Link to feature:

    Welcome to Enve Composites

    Good for you Kris, glad you're getting your due.
    "You can make some of the people happy some of the time, but you can't make all of the people happy all of the time."

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    51
    The new Profile Racing Elite MTB hubs are really cool. I have some on a trials bike, and a DH bike, and they are awesome. Less than 2 degree engagement. I am building a set of Enve AM rims with them, really excited!

    Profile Racing E-Store

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    673
    I have both wheelsets, and I believe my dt comp/I9/Flow to be stiffer than my flow/I9/alloy spoke setup.

    The aluminum spokes do come out to be about 60 grams per wheel lighter, and I think its simply the lack of nips.

Members who have read this thread: 3

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.