Hub Question

[Eric St. Mary]

I'm trying to decide on what type of rear hub to get; its either going
to be a Chris King or Phil Wood. I don't currently need the disc type
for any reason, in the future, as these hubs are supposed to last
"forever", I may. Is there any reason not to purchase a disc compatible
hub, excluding the few extra bucks, when building up a new wheel?

Eric



--
>--------------------------<
Posted via cyclingforums.com
http://www.cyclingforums.com

[Mike S.]

"Eric St. Mary" > wrote in message
...
> I'm trying to decide on what type of rear hub to get; its either going
> to be a Chris King or Phil Wood. I don't currently need the disc type
> for any reason, in the future, as these hubs are supposed to last
> "forever", I may. Is there any reason not to purchase a disc compatible
> hub, excluding the few extra bucks, when building up a new wheel?
>
> Eric
>
1. weight
2. dish in the front wheel
3. you don't need it (but when has THAT ever stopped anyone?)

There's always going to be specials on disc wheels, etc. why pay for
something you don't need?

Mike

[Jon Bond]

"Mike S." <mikeshaw2@coxDOTnet> wrote in message
news:ZxR_a.258$cj1.93@fed1read06...
>
> "Eric St. Mary" > wrote in message
> ...
> > I'm trying to decide on what type of rear hub to get; its either going
> > to be a Chris King or Phil Wood. I don't currently need the disc type
> > for any reason, in the future, as these hubs are supposed to last
> > "forever", I may. Is there any reason not to purchase a disc compatible
> > hub, excluding the few extra bucks, when building up a new wheel?
> >
> > Eric
> >
> 1. weight

Chris King specs:
Classic: 112g front, 268g rear.
Disc: ISO 166g front, 306g rear. Total gain: 110g, or a bit under a
quarter of a pound. Unless you're a major weight weenie, thats really not
all that much extra weight. Yeah, if you're building a superlightweight
racing machine, then go for the classics. Actually, go for the American
Classic or WTB ones, they're lighter. But if he's considering Phil Woods,
which are heavy anyway, then why not sacrifice a tiny bit of weight for a
much more versatile wheelset?

> 2. dish in the front wheel

The spoke lengths in my front WTB Laserdisc Lite wheels were 2mm different.
And how about this: You get less dish in the rear wheel.

> 3. you don't need it (but when has THAT ever stopped anyone?)

But if he's planning on upgrading later ("In the future... I may"), he's
saving himself a lot of money now. The disc hubs are about $30 more for the
pair, on a $400 set of hubs. Thats not even 10%. But if you buy non disc
wheels now, and decide to go disc sometime in the future, you have to buy a
whole new set of $400 hubs, PLUS new spokes, PLUS have the whole wheel
relaced. You might as well get new rims too, since you're changing
everything else. And guess what? Thats another $600 wheelset you're
buying. Ok, so you can change the rear hub internals over, and save maybe
$100, but still - Why not pay a tiny bit more now to save a crapload of
money down the line? Not to mention resale value - fewer and fewer high end
mountain bikes are coming with rim brakes, and for good reason.

> There's always going to be specials on disc wheels, etc. why pay for
> something you don't need?

Nobody "NEEDS" chris king or phil wood hubs, period. They're luxury items,
plain and simple. So is a high end mountain bike. And finding a well built
Chris King Disc wheel on sale is not easy - the cheapest I could find (at
jensonusa.com) were $465, which is actually a hell of a good deal, but is
still not cheap by any stretch of the imagination.

About a year ago I bought new wheels, rim brake. I just built up a new bike
and put discs on it. Now my nice, handbuilt wheelset from the old bike (the
frame cracked) is sitting in my basement, not getting any use. I might put
them back on whatever frame the company sends back, because its fork doesn't
have disc tabs, and use it as my singlespeed, but I should have just bought
a disc wheelset and either had a spare set of disc wheels now just in case,
or not had to drop another $400 on a new wheelset.

> Mike

Jon Bond
(btw, chris kings are lighter, phil woods are a bit heavier, but pretty
bombproof. Not that the King's aren't. I'd personaly go king, as long as
you can stand the beehive sound!)

[Doug Huffman]

I have Phil Woods (disc) front and rear. They're way over twenty thousand
miles old - near thirty thousand. Have you ever worn out a freehub clutch?
I doubt it since few wheels, being disposable boutique items, are kept long
enough to do so. I cannot speak highly enough of PWs.


"Jon Bond" > wrote in message
...
> > "Eric St. Mary" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > I'm trying to decide on what type of rear hub to get; its either going
> > > to be a Chris King or Phil Wood. I don't currently need the disc type
> > > for any reason, in the future, as these hubs are supposed to last
> > > "forever", I may. Is there any reason not to purchase a disc
compatible
> > > hub, excluding the few extra bucks, when building up a new wheel?
> > >
> > > Eric
> > >
>
> Nobody "NEEDS" chris king or phil wood hubs, period. They're luxury
items,
> plain and simple. So is a high end mountain bike. And finding a well
built
> Chris King Disc wheel on sale is not easy - the cheapest I could find (at
> jensonusa.com) were $465, which is actually a hell of a good deal, but is
> still not cheap by any stretch of the imagination.
>
>

[Mike S.]

"> > > I'm trying to decide on what type of rear hub to get; its either
going
> > > to be a Chris King or Phil Wood. I don't currently need the disc type
> > > for any reason, in the future, as these hubs are supposed to last
> > > "forever", I may. Is there any reason not to purchase a disc
compatible
> > > hub, excluding the few extra bucks, when building up a new wheel?
> > >
> > > Eric
> > >
> > 1. weight
>
> Chris King specs:
> Classic: 112g front, 268g rear.
> Disc: ISO 166g front, 306g rear. Total gain: 110g, or a bit under a
> quarter of a pound. Unless you're a major weight weenie, thats really not
> all that much extra weight. Yeah, if you're building a superlightweight
> racing machine, then go for the classics. Actually, go for the American
> Classic or WTB ones, they're lighter. But if he's considering Phil Woods,
> which are heavy anyway, then why not sacrifice a tiny bit of weight for a
> much more versatile wheelset?


Versatile for whom? The guy that buys them when he wants to change the
color of his hubs? If he's not using the discs, then why pay the weight
penalty at all? If the disc upgrade was say, next year, I'd say go for it,
but if the OP isn't planning on going disc any time real soon, why bother?

>
> > 2. dish in the front wheel
>
> The spoke lengths in my front WTB Laserdisc Lite wheels were 2mm
different.
> And how about this: You get less dish in the rear wheel.
>
> > 3. you don't need it (but when has THAT ever stopped anyone?)
>
> But if he's planning on upgrading later ("In the future... I may"), he's
> saving himself a lot of money now. The disc hubs are about $30 more for
the
> pair, on a $400 set of hubs. Thats not even 10%. But if you buy non disc
> wheels now, and decide to go disc sometime in the future, you have to buy
a
> whole new set of $400 hubs, PLUS new spokes, PLUS have the whole wheel
> relaced.

Yeah, and he can probably sell off the wheelset to someone on
r.b.marketplace to offset the costs, or heaven forbid, buy a set of used
wheels for "cheap." (as if a PW disc wheelset ever is...) There's always
someone selling something fancy for a lot less that you can buy new. Ask me
about my $90 Nuke Proof/517 wheelset...

You might as well get new rims too, since you're changing
> everything else. And guess what? Thats another $600 wheelset you're
> buying. Ok, so you can change the rear hub internals over, and save maybe
> $100, but still - Why not pay a tiny bit more now to save a crapload of
> money down the line? Not to mention resale value - fewer and fewer high
end
> mountain bikes are coming with rim brakes, and for good reason.
>

Hey, gotta point out that "standards" change. Who is to say that when the
OP is ready to go disc, that there isn't some new proprietary mounting
system (XTR!) that makes the purchase of disc hubs now obsolete? I know
that there's going to be something that he can do, just like there are
people still running 6/7sp stuff here...

> > There's always going to be specials on disc wheels, etc. why pay for
> > something you don't need?
>
> Nobody "NEEDS" chris king or phil wood hubs, period. They're luxury
items,
> plain and simple. So is a high end mountain bike. And finding a well
built
> Chris King Disc wheel on sale is not easy - the cheapest I could find (at
> jensonusa.com) were $465, which is actually a hell of a good deal, but is
> still not cheap by any stretch of the imagination.
>
> About a year ago I bought new wheels, rim brake. I just built up a new
bike
> and put discs on it. Now my nice, handbuilt wheelset from the old bike
(the
> frame cracked) is sitting in my basement, not getting any use. I might
put
> them back on whatever frame the company sends back, because its fork
doesn't
> have disc tabs, and use it as my singlespeed, but I should have just
bought
> a disc wheelset and either had a spare set of disc wheels now just in
case,
> or not had to drop another $400 on a new wheelset.
>

I wish I had hindsight glasses like they're using those TV ads... Woulda,
coulda, shoulda and we'd all be millionaires!

Mike



> > Mike
>
> Jon Bond
> (btw, chris kings are lighter, phil woods are a bit heavier, but pretty
> bombproof. Not that the King's aren't. I'd personaly go king, as long as
> you can stand the beehive sound!)
>
>
>

[Chalo]

"Jon Bond" > wrote:

> "Mike S." <mikeshaw2@coxDOTnet> wrote:
> >
> > "Eric St. Mary" > wrote:
> > >
> > > Is there any reason not to purchase a disc compatible
> > > hub, excluding the few extra bucks, when building up a new wheel?
> > >
> > 2. dish in the front wheel
>
> The spoke lengths in my front WTB Laserdisc Lite wheels were 2mm different.
> And how about this: You get less dish in the rear wheel.

The reduction in strength of a dished wheel is on the same order as
the reduction in tension in the looser side's spokes. That means you
can wind up trading off _half_ of the strength in your front wheel to
have it "disc ready". This degree of weakening can't be worth it if
you are hard on your wheels.

At least your rim won't be hitting the brake pads when the wheel
collapses. :-)

The wider front axle spacing of 20mm front disc hubs (110mm IIRC) was
intended to address the grievous structural shortcoming of front disc
wheels.

Chalo Colina

[David Kunz]

Chalo wrote:
> David Kunz > wrote:
>
>
>>Chalo wrote:
>>
>>
>>>The reduction in strength of a dished wheel is on the same order as
>>>the reduction in tension in the looser side's spokes. That means you
>>>can wind up trading off _half_ of the strength in your front wheel to
>>>have it "disc ready".
>>
>>Who's hard on their front rims? I've never had a problem with one --
>>they last forever. It's the back ones that I keep breaking.
>
>
> Front wheels may not bear as much static weight as rears, but they
> must withstand more side loads and braking loads than rear wheels.
> The reason fronts hold up better that rears is because most of them
> are dishless and most rear wheels are dished. On up-to-date bikes
> with about 2:1 left:right flange spacing in the rear, a symmetrical
> front is about twice as capable of withstanding loads.

I was talking about disc wheels -- I should have been clearer. I've
totalled 4 rear rims since I put this front rim on and it shows no signs
of problems. I tension my rims to 120 kg on the drive side in the rear
and disc side in the front. I usually end up at about 80 kg on the
other side in the rear -- it's been a while since I needed to build a
front and don't remember what they turn out to be :).

> Disc wheelsets tend to reverse this inequality, with more equal
> tension in the rear and a heavily dished front wheel.

I understand the theory -- I'm just talking experience (and I'm a
clydesdale -- 220-235 depending on how much riding I'm getting in :)).
All I was saying is that strong enough is strong enough :).

>>I really
>>wish that I'd gone 36 hole when I bought the Chris King...
>
>
> 48 spokes make for a stronger wheel yet, and a prettier one too. 48
> 15/17ga. spokes weigh a bit less than 36 14/15ga. spokes to boot. If
> you want strong wheels, and you're going to part with the insane
> amount of money required to buy Chris King or Phil Wood hubs, it seems
> like a no-brainer to make them 48 hole models.

Never considered 48 -- didn't know that they existed! If my Chris King
ever wears out, or when this bike becomes my beater and I buy a new one,
I'll check it out :).

David

[Eric St. Mary]

Thanks to all, for your advice and opinions. I decided to go with a 36H
disc hub. I found a NOS Chris King Disco Tech 36H with the ISO adapter
at speedgoat.com for $150 and have it along with a MA3 rim on the way.
My rear wheel will run much less than a new fancy integrated CK or Phil
Wood, oh how I would still like to have the phil. If anyone wants to
trade me an has a 36H 135mm spaced Phil disc or nondisc let me know.

Eric



--
>--------------------------<
Posted via cyclingforums.com
http://www.cyclingforums.com