Re: [CR] Where are the high flange hubs?

(Example: Events:Cirque du Cyclisme)

Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys
Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 06:10:38 -0800 (PST)
From: "Fred Rafael Rednor" <fred_rednor@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [CR] Where are the high flange hubs?
To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
In-Reply-To: <20041120140534.9035.qmail@web11908.mail.yahoo.com>


My friends, My previous message ws meant to be off-list but I still stand by my remarks: i.e. in many years of touring and racing, my backside cannot feel the difference between high and low flanged hubs. I can feel the difference between different tires; and between clinchers aand tubulars. But between high and low flanged? No way... Best regards, Fred Rednor - Arlington, Virginia
> Off-list:
> Just tell him that 50 years of riding withthe same tuchus
> and multiple wheel sets has convinced you there's no
> difference
> between high and low flange. (At least my tuchus can't tell
> the difference - but I only have 45 years of riding on it...)
> Fred
>
>
> --- Jerome & Elizabeth Moos <jerrymoos@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> > Well, maybe, but I'd want to see how the tests were
> > conducted. Maybe different wheels react similarly to
> radial
> > loading, but actual riding involves lateral loads, which
> > might be an entirely different story. As an engineer
> myself,
> > I'm always suspicious of "scientific testing". True,
> > sometimes it can explode myths, but testing only gives you
> > the answers to the questions you design the test to ask.
> > It's all too common to see people design tests to prove
> what
> > they believe, often with total sincerity, and the firm but
> > mistaken belief that they are being "scientific". In my
> > mind it takes more than a few hours of testing to
> > conclusively disprove millions of manyears of collective
> > practical experiene, even granting that experience is
> > subjective and can be influenced by popoular myth.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Jerry Moos
> > Houston, TX
> >
> > HM & SS Sachs <sachs@erols.com> wrote:
> > Ted Ernst has done an excellent job of capturing the
> > conventional wisdom about performance differences between
> > high flange and low flange hubs. My good friend Jim
> > Papadopoulos actually did measurements on wheels,
> > particularly on spoking patterns (radial to 4 cross). In
> the
> > test stand, the differences were so small as to be
> > unnoticeable. What continues to amaze me is how much the
> > "engineering" of the bikes we love was driven by marketing,
> > myth, and tradition. It's not unique in this (think about
> > house construction). Here's an example: Schwinn (and
> others)
> > did a lot of real engineering for their manufacturing
> > processes, but not nearly as much for the product design
> > itself -- unless you count waterpipe welding and grinding.
> >
> > Again, I'm not criticizing Ted, for whom I have great
> > respect, but just pointing out where all of us were, and
> how
> > it seems to differ from some other fields that are better
> > capitalized.
> >
> > harvey sachs
> >
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > It's not a matter of better,but a matter of proper
> > application of product.
> > In general terms, high flange hubs were prettier?(to the
> > commodity broker
> > importer),and several $ more expensive. A lot of the older
> > racing bikes were
> > fairly flexible so a stiffer more responsive high flange
> > balanced some of
> > that out.
> > High flanges were also nice for short course tight corner
> > racing.
> > Remember, there were few racers but
> > a lot of new riders who wanted fast , light bikes and a
> > racing bike is what
> > they got. A good clincher wheel sport touring bike with
> > lesser quality
> > equipment
> > was cheaper and obviously not as good. There were few good
> > frame sport
> > touring bikes on the market during the '60's. Custom, sure,
> > but not
> > production
> > hand built as the " racing bikes" were.
> > It was not a matter of the customer getting smarter as it
> was
> > the shops and
> > importers getting to know bikes better and wising up. Maybe
> > the europeans
> > had a little sales con going on also to get rid of less
> > popular items at
> > home.
> > The small flange hubs were better for rough roads and long
> > distance riding.
> > As the frame tubing metallurgy improved the stiffer frames
> > allowed for more
> > small flange hub use and it got to be standard as time went
> > along. In my
> > opinion
> > a large flange hub is still nicer for short course snappy
> > riding. But with
> > today's
> > technology. metallurgy, carbon, aero shaped rims, one can
> > beat themselves to
> > aches and pains. My feeling on this is only for vintage
> bike
> > use. Today's
> > equipment
> > is much nicer, but the old stuff is much more fun. Modern
> > riders and,
> > equipment are
> > blended with comfort, weight,and efficiency in mind. During
> > the '60's-'70's
> > I raced on
> > 28h Arc en Ciel rims, high flange hubs in all the So. Cal.
> > races and hardly
> > ever
> > had to touch up the true. Ted Ernst.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> >
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today!
> http://my.yahoo.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
http://my.yahoo.com