Re: [CR]high flange vs. low flange

(Example: Humor)

From: "Ken Sanford" <kanford@comcast.net>
To: <gregb51@lycos.com>, <Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
References: <LFHFOMAELGJPBHAA@mailcity.com>
Subject: Re: [CR]high flange vs. low flange
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 15:03:59 -0500


Greg

I agree that it more of a 'it looks nice' thing than anything else. There ain't much you can do to a LF hub to make it stand out....

I love the Campy HF track hubs (both the record one and the more recent 'Sheriff's star' model because they are just simply prettier. (Looking for a rear HF of either type to match singleton fronts)

But there must be some reason. You probably know that Campy made a High/Low rear hub with the drive side HF and the other LF. I had two but one of them broke at a spoke hole on the HF side.

Ken Sanford
Kensington, MD


----- Original Message -----
From: Greg Brooks
To: Classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Sent: Sunday, November 30, 2003 11:20 AM
Subject: [CR]high flange vs. low flange



> Hi all,
> I looked in the archives unsuccessfully for this topic, which has probably been covered adnauseum, but didn't find any info. So... does anyone feel like discussing the thinking behind Campy's earlier production of high & low flange road hubsets? I use both, & for the life of me I can't tell a difference between the two(when using same spoke hole # and lacing configuration). I'm guessing it was more a cosmetic-marketing thing, as opposed to genuine weight or "aero" issue. Strengh also doesn't seem to be an issue, at least in my nonracing experience. Thanks in advance for any interesting comments.
> Greg Brooks
> Ridgetop,TN