Guys at Just Riding Along reckon it will be good as rim is strong, but I'm getting cold feet and may stick with Super Comps.
These are for XC riding to get a good profile on some big tyres.
Not seen too much on these rims on STW; they are 35 mm wide (28 mm internal) and weight 530 g or so -- 70 more than Flows. And way wider and stronger. And cheaper.
And they come in red.
Bike Forum
Velocity P35 rims plus Revolution spokes -- thoughts please
-
Posted 3 months ago #
-
I've got 29" P35s on Super Comps, on a Hope SS / 135 F hub combo. They've taken a few knocks and they're pretty much dead-straight, seem like pretty tough wheels. If it's for a 26" wheel (guessed from the weight) I'd trust JRAs opinions, revs should be fine.
They're great rims that do wonders for the tyre profile but don't go too low PSI as they don't seem as hard atthe edges as some rims, no real issues tho.
Posted 3 months ago # -
Thanks Jameso, yes, for 26er wheels.
What tyres to do you run on yours? I'm interested in the 135 mm front hub wheel and hope to move on to that when I've saved up enough for a Jones.Posted 3 months ago # -
What is the point of using Revs (or Supercomps) with those? What are you hoping to gain?
Posted 3 months ago # -
Ardent 2.4 EXO, sometimes with a 2.25 LUST rear in the summer. Purgatory 2.2 2-bliss F+R at the moment (12-13psi on crusty snow / ice worked well over last few days). Sealed the rims easily with a few layers of insulation tape.
Perfect wheels for a Jones.
Posted 3 months ago # -
I don't do big drops, so I can lose some weight and go with a lighter spoke.
These are for a rigid bike so bigger tyres are better, and tyres come up huge on these rims.
2.4 Rocket Rons on these rims are massive.Posted 3 months ago # -
so I can lose some weight
Get some lighter rims then.
Posted 3 months ago # -
Get some lighter rims then
With respect, not great advice. OP's reason for this combo is spot on ime. But a lot of people still think lighter rims are better rims, perhaps, if you like 45psi in your tyres and think 150g saved will really make you faster overall.
Posted 3 months ago # -
rev likely fine but if you are concerned then comps won't make the wheels noticeably heavier.
Posted 3 months ago # -
think 150g saved will really make you faster overall.
Well if 150g saved won't make you faster, then neither will 80g saved!
I just don't see the point in saving weight on spokes for this sort of wheel - maybe on superlight ones, where you're trying to save every gram, but on these you'll only notice the difference in the decreased stiffness, and in your wallet.
Posted 3 months ago # -
I have tried building wheels with Sapim Leader spokes (same as DTswiss rev's) and I found they twisted a little when tensioning and truing. This meant stress relieving always through the wheel out a bit. Not by much only to about 0.5mm radially and latterally on a 700c rim but since I always aim for roundess and trueness of less than 0.2mm this was not accpetable to me. Given the width of the rim proposed they might be fine but it all depends on what you consider and striaght and round wheel. My definition is a bit stricter than most wheel manufacturers it seems. Also 2.0/1.5/2.0mm spokes are fine (in theory) on the front and for the non drive side rear they should be used on the drive side rear.
I would stick to comps as the wheel will be much stronger. Also I ride rims that are much narrower (17mm internal) and never have any problems with the wheels bashing them around thetford forest and local trials which get bumpy.
Nowt wrong with velocity rims though from what I have heard.
Posted 3 months ago # -
Well if 150g saved won't make you faster, then neither will 80g saved!
You're right. My point though is that if you gain weight and width on a rim there are advantages that are worth the weight gain for some riders - technical trails, rigid bikes, etc.
But also if you have 2 parts that do the same thing equally well, you can justify the cost or don't really care about it and safety isn't affected (Comps vs Super Comps in my case), choose the lighter part. No-one wants a bike to be heavier for no good reason.
So to save on spokes to offset rim width gain makes sense. To save 150g or so on the rims but end up on 17mm wide rims that need much higher pressures and give a poorer tyre profile for 2.3-2.4s, well that makes no sense to me. P35s are at one extreme end really, but it's the end of things I'd want for a rigid bike.
Posted 3 months ago # -
But also if you have 2 parts that do the same thing equally well, you can justify the cost or don't really care about it and safety isn't affected (Comps vs Super Comps in my case)
But the Super Comps will make the wheel less stiff - and therefore less strong - so they don't do the same thing equally well. Seems a silly small amount of weight to save given the difference in performance on what presumably aren't race wheels. You'll never notice the difference in weight, but you might notice the decreased stiffness.
Posted 3 months ago # -
With apologies for a OT diversion, and I don't build wheels so I could be wrong, but doesn't wheel stiffness come from spoke tension (and triangulation) more than spoke thickness, assuming both spokes are capable of being tensioned as much as you need to? A spoke on it's own has little stiffness and any gain x 32 still isn't a lot in face of the side-forces on a bike wheel.
I will say that these wheels are super-stiff and fitted to a bike where you'd notice it if they weren't. Stiffer than my 26" AM XTs, DT Tricons etc.
Posted 3 months ago # -
Had to nip out and missed all the action.
What rocked my (slightly lame) world was this page on rolling resistance from schwalbe:http://www.schwalbetires.com/tech_info/rolling_resistance
Basically, unless out and out acceleration is your aim (as it is to a racer), a wider tyre (and hence a wider rim) makes for a more efficient wheel, i.e. one with LESS rolling resistance:
from that Schwalbe page:
Small diameter tires have a higher rolling resistance at the same tire pressure, because tire deformation is proportionally more important, in other words the tire is "less round". Wider tires roll better than narrow ones. This assertion generally generates skepticism, nevertheless at the same tire pressure a narrow tire deflects more and so deforms more.But I've just been talking to Jeff Jones too much!
Posted 3 months ago # -
I think I'll go for Super Comps based on all this, BTW. Thanks.
Posted 3 months ago # -
But I've just been talking to Jeff Jones too much!
Not a bad thing, ever ) If he has time to talk, listen.. So what are you going for?
Posted 3 months ago # -
the revs will build a flexier wheel than thicker spokes. HOw much I don't know, and the rim will play a part also.
Posted 3 months ago # -
doesn't wheel stiffness come from spoke tension (and triangulation) more than spoke thickness
No - the spoke tension makes no difference at all to wheel stiffness (we have the agreement of a member of the IoP on this one
)A spoke on it's own has little stiffness
A spoke has plenty of stiffness - if it didn't your wheels would flop about all over the place. What do you think supports the side forces on a wheel - the rim doesn't do it all on it's own? Just try bending an unbuilt rim, and then try bending a wheel built up with that rim.
Posted 3 months ago # -
P35's are very good, I have some for my jones when it's not in fat front mode. Can't go quite as low pressure as a stans rim without burping though.
Jameso- I can get Ti uno elliptical rings for direct mount on a middleburn
Posted 3 months ago # -
rom that Schwalbe page:
Small diameter tires have a higher rolling resistance at the same tire pressure, because tire deformation is proportionally more important, in other words the tire is "less round". Wider tires roll better than narrow ones. This assertion generally generates skepticism, nevertheless at the same tire pressure a narrow tire deflects more and so deforms more.Very true. Tyre pressure is by far the dominate term in the equation for rolling resistance along with rider weight and rolling radius. Narrow tyre run higher pressure in general and leads to their lower rolling resitance.
I run 2.0" tyres on my 17 mm rims on one bike and 1.7" on another but this suits my riding and saves weight. I keep my 2.3" tyres for another bike with 19mm internal widths. Really I should stick to 2.1" tyres with that bike.
Posted 3 months ago # -
Narrow tyre run higher pressure in general and leads to their lower rolling resitance.
And harsher ride...
Posted 3 months ago # -
Also true but I manage and like the ride I get from narrow tyres. Also the narrow tyres are on old steel framed MTB's (with lack of tyre clearence) with steel forks. Maybe the flexibilty of the frames helps out here (these two bike are not a stiff as a modern Alu or carbon frames).
Posted 3 months ago # -
what I find interesting is that it's not just a comfort thing with larger tyres.
they roll better -- a larger tyre has less resistance than a smaller one run with the same pressure, if I understand this correctly.
Which all explains why I'll be joining the (front) fat tyre brigade at some point.
Saving up for a ti space frame.
Not that there isn't a trade off with a big tyre, but I think it will be worth it.Posted 3 months ago # -
It's quite different on mtbs though - grip becomes a factor, and lower pressure = more grip.
Posted 3 months ago # -
Have you looked at the pacenti 28 rims from JRA? I don't know whether to bite the bullet and go with them or get arch EX. They seem a logical progression from the p35 but might not be quite as strong. The guy at JRA says he's given them some DH/rocky use on a big bike and they've been fine tough so might be alright.
Posted 3 months ago # -
The numbers on the pacenti rims look v good imo -- light as the crest (nearly), wide as the flow. But I want something wider -- pacenti are only 2 mm wider internally than the crest (which is 21 mm internal) if I remember right; the p35 is 28 mm internal.
Posted 3 months ago # -
aracer, what's the loP?
More material in the spoke will add some stiffness (proportionately) but - (geek on) - since they have to be under some tension to make a structure that is stable / stiff, way stiffer than the sum of the spokes alone, and more spoke tension than the basic structure needs doesn't make the wheel stiffer, I'd say as long as the spoke can hold the tension you need any stiffness gained from the thicker spoke is simply by adding more material. Not the most effective way to increase stiffness compared to looking a the stucture. You're probably adding a little to something that isn't responsible for the majority of the wheel's stiffness.
So the structure (rim and hub dimension) would make a greater differance then spoke guage in reality, especially if you consider stiffness-to-weight. I'm kind of interested to know by how much, but I expect it's complicated and wheel designs aren't something I know much about, beyond riding them.I know my 135mm front is waaay stiffer than normal 29er wheels, to the point that I can't understand why sus forks stuck with 100mm front spacing on 29er forks.
(tazzy, make one to fit my 4-bolt cranks and I'll take it but as much as i like the ring shape I'm not buying new cranks too! I do like the midleburns though.. I'm having minor clearance issues as it's effectively a 36T max diameter, the frame's a bit tight there anyway so I have the EBB way fwd with little room for stretch - hows the fit on yours?)
Posted 3 months ago # -
Pacenti's do look good.. a 35mm version would be like a better quality P35.
Posted 3 months ago # -
fit on mine is fine I just moved the EBB a couple of mm to the right on the jones as it still sits flush in the frame and no clearance issues at all.
the integrated proto thingy i'm playin with is blinkin ace, approx 80g lighter and stiffer, so it's sitting on the race ss
normal style 4 bolt ti will be no issues at all, I'll get prices next week so I'll post up a thread as if there's a bit of interest we may be able to get a group buy discount again
Posted 3 months ago # -
Pacenti's do look good.. a 35mm version would be like a better quality P35.
kirk designed the P35 anyway in collaboration with velocity
Posted 3 months ago # -
And for that he's a top bloke ) can't have been easy persuading them to make it, but the P35 is a pricey rim for a sleeved join, the 28s are welded.
All this stuff about rims and wheel weight etc, I've been thinking about how good a carbon 35mm might be, just to test whether I truly don't care about rim weight.. that at the back and a 650b x 3.2" semi-fat front would be fun to try out.
edit,
Count me in for a ti 4-bolt. I was going to shift the EBB over, prob better to mount it in big ring position and move the rear cog over, to move the EBB all the way back. Gotta slam those stays on 29ers. See you can't do that with a posh spiderless ring )Posted 3 months ago # -
how about a 30mm ENVE carbon one? 440g for the 29er one
Posted 3 months ago # -
Maybe.. but it needs to be at least as wide as the P35.
40mm wide / 500-550g / tubeless ready would be spot on. I would go for those if they made them, trying not to look at the price. I'd probably do some proper research on spokes before getting them built too
Posted 3 months ago # -
they roll better -- a larger tyre has less resistance than a smaller one run with the same pressure, if I understand this correctly.
I think the wide rim / big tyre is about maximising the air volume too, then you can use less pressure so the tyre can deform to the ground rather than be bounced around. The big rims work for me anyway, but with these bikes the whole is just so much greater than the sum of the parts. A Ti SF? You'll love it.. he was enthusing about the fat front to the point where I have to try one sometime, but I'm still getting used to how good the bike is with the std front.
Posted 3 months ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
