Tied and Soldered

Quoted message said:

Although the true believers on wreck.bike don't believe that tying
(and soldering) spokes was invented by John Starley to prevent spokes
from causing an endo by flailing around on high wheelers, the
motorcycle folks know otherwise.  To make up for that, Triumph made
spoked wheels with spoke elbows unsupported for more than two
diameters from the flange.  These are classic spoke breakers, like the
ones DT once made with longer elbows for easier spoke insertion.

The DTs didn't com close to that, though. You would have to use a
10mm stack of washers on the spoks on that Triumph. And at least DT
had an excuse that was not "looks." -- Jay Beattie.

Quoted message said:

Although the true believers on wreck.bike don't believe that tying
(and soldering) spokes was invented by John Starley to prevent spokes
from causing an endo by flailing around on high wheelers, the
motorcycle folks know otherwise. To make up for that, Triumph made
spoked wheels with spoke elbows unsupported for more than two
diameters from the flange. These are classic spoke breakers, like the
ones DT once made with longer elbows for easier spoke insertion.

http://www.triumphrat.net/twins-technical-talk/75065-broken-spoke.html

are you trying to confess that you now understand, after all this time,
that spoke breakage is a function of bending fatigue, not "residual
stress"? or are you just looking for attention?

Jay Beattie said:

Quoted message said:

Although the true believers on wreck.bike don't believe that tying
(and soldering) spokes was invented by John Starley to prevent
spokes from causing an endo by flailing around on high wheelers,
the motorcycle folks know otherwise.  To make up for that, Triumph
made spoked wheels with spoke elbows unsupported for more than two
diameters from the flange.  These are classic spoke breakers, like
the ones DT once made with longer elbows for easier spoke
insertion.

Quoted message said:

The DTs didn't come close to that, though. You would have to use a
10mm stack of washers on the spokes on that Triumph. And at least DT
had an excuse that was not "looks."

A stack of washers might make you feel better about it, but the spoke
would get nothing from them, because it must reach around the other
spoke with its elbow whether it has washers between the flange and
elbow or not. This is a major design error. All the spokes should
have short elbows and come from opposite sides of the flange, as on
most bicycle wheels.

Jobst Brandt

Quoted message said:

Although the true believers on wreck.bike don't believe that tying
(and soldering) spokes was invented by John Starley to prevent spokes
from causing an endo by flailing around on high wheelers, the
motorcycle folks know otherwise. To make up for that, Triumph made
spoked wheels with spoke elbows unsupported for more than two
diameters from the flange. These are classic spoke breakers, like the
ones DT once made with longer elbows for easier spoke insertion.

http://www.triumphrat.net/twins-technical-talk/75065-broken-spoke.html

Jobst Brandt

Dear Jobst,

The only contemporary sources that I can find _never_ mention tying
and soldering to restrain broken spokes.

They talk about tying and soldering to strengthen the wheel. The more
plausible claim was that tying and soldering effectively created a
much bigger hub flange, while weirder claims were put forward about
restraining sideways movements.

They also talk about reducing rattle. Long spokes on highwheelers do
rattle if crossed.

It would be strange if early inventors wanted to tie and solder spokes
to restrain them when they broke. A spoke that broke at the elbow was
already well-restrained by the crossing--anyone who's ever had to bend
and wiggle a broken-elbow spoke out of a 3x lacing knows that.

And a two-foot long spoke that breaks at the rim (a much rarer
failure) is still restrained by being woven through the other spokes
and will not be restrained much better by tying and soldering down
next to the hub.

In other words, tying and soldering wouldn't do much to restrain
already interlaced spokes when they broke. But even if it's a dumb
idea, someone might have tried it in good faith--Starley or someone
else might have tried it and the useless idea might have caught on.

Here's the earliest patent that I've seen with tying and soldering.
The explanation sounds like nonsense, but Palmer claims that he ties
and solders for strength:

"The crossing parts of the spokes k l may be connected with wire bound
round the crossing parts and soldered. By arranging and connecting the
spokes in the manner described a direct tensile strain is put on each
spoke without any oblique strain."

http://www.google.com/patents?id=r9ZuAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA1&dq=359809

Here's another earlypatent, in which Latta uses special clips
_without_ soldering for connecting spokes:
http://www.google.com/patents?id=oChZAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA62&dq=377900

Frustratingly, Latta doesn't explain why the hell he connects his
spokes.

Here's a patent by Warwick for a "double-sleeve" (44 in the diagrams)
that joins the spokes (43 in the diagram) where they cross on a
highwheeler:

"For the purpose of increasing the strength of a wheel, either front
or rear, by holding the spokes 43 in line, the double sleeve 44 is
provided . . ."
http://www.google.com/patents?id=ZndnAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA20&dq=384946

Like Latta, Warwick was a prolific and successful early inventor,
working for a bicycle company. Neither Latta nor Warwick mention
restraining broken spokes when they insist on lashing spokes together.

Here's Peter Gendron, another famous early inventor (Gendron Bicycle
Company), explaining that tying and soldering prevented rattling:

"The advantage of this improvement [Gendron put spokes into the hub in
some odd way] consists in thereby accomplishing the result of causing
the two spokes at their point of crossing to bind each other . . .
[yes, they all wrote like this] . . . the tension of the spokes being
sufficient to completely effect this result, so that the spokes will
not rattle when the wheel is in motion. The same object is
accomplished with the present construction of wheel by winding or
tying the spokes at their point of crossing with small wire; but in
practice this is very annoying in different ways--as, for instance, in
cleaning the wheels or in replacing the spokes."

http://www.google.com/patents?id=NIdaAAAAEBAJ&pg=PP1&dq=434146#PPP2,M1

Of course, Latta, Warwick, and Gendron could all have been unaware of
some early theory about restraining broken spokes.

But until someone finds an earlier reference to restraining broken
spokes, there's nothing but belief to support the theory that this was
the original purpose of tying and soldering. So far, all the
references are to strengthening wheels and stopping rattles.

In other words, you're the "true believer"--you keep telling us that
you vaguely remember reading somewhere that Starley tied and soldered
spokes to restrain them when they broke.

Let us know if you ever find the reference.

I keep looking, but so far I haven't found _anything_ about _anyone_
who said that he lashed spokes together for safety.

But I keep finding clear contemporary explanations that spokes were
tied and soldered for strength (probably wrong, but that was the
theory) and to stop rattling (it worked).

Here are a few more previously mentioned references.

In "Collecting & Restoring Antique Bicycles," G. Donald Adams writes
on page 61 about how the 1887 New Light Mail Roadster differed from an
1882 Columbia in various ways, one of which was:

"Tangent spokes were used and were tied where they crossed to prvent
rattles."

***

In 1898, the author of "The Modern Bicycle and its accessories"
mentions the pros and cons of tying and soldering as strength and
explained that solderless clips might be better than heating the
spokes. But he never mentions restraining spokes as the reason:

"The majority of them [tangent-spoke wheel makers] tie their spokes to
each other where they cross. There are a great many of the makers who
do not tie them at all, there being some difference of opinion as to
the benefit derived from this treatment."

"Those in favor of tying spokes say that tying two or more [!] spokes
together at the crossing some distance above the hub shortens the
leverage from the rim and practically gives the wheel an additional
hub; that they are also stiffer against side or lateral strain, and
that the only good tangent spoke is one that is tied at the crossing
with its mates. Those who are opposed to tying spokes say that tying
them together makes them too rigid and inflexible [!], and that the
process of wiring them and soldering them together has a tendency to
crystallize the spokes at this point owing to the heat required to
solder them. This part of the argument, however, has been met by by
not wiring and soldering the spokes at the crossing, but by pinching
on them at this point a metal clamp such as is used on the Humber
wheel. The opponents of tying the spokes assert that the very
stiffness and rigidness which the wheel possesses when the spokes are
tied has a tendency to also crystallize them at the hub flanges as
well as cause them to break [!]."

http://books.google.com/books?id=1CRyfR7JclIC&printsec=titlepage#PPA69,M1

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Quoted message said:

Jay Beattie said:

Quoted message said:

Although the true believers on wreck.bike don't believe that tying
(and soldering) spokes was invented by John Starley to prevent
spokes from causing an endo by flailing around on high wheelers,
the motorcycle folks know otherwise. To make up for that, Triumph
made spoked wheels with spoke elbows unsupported for more than two
diameters from the flange. These are classic spoke breakers, like
the ones DT once made with longer elbows for easier spoke
insertion.

Quoted message said:

The DTs didn't come close to that, though. You would have to use a
10mm stack of washers on the spokes on that Triumph. And at least DT
had an excuse that was not "looks."

A stack of washers might make you feel better about it, but the spoke
would get nothing from them, because it must reach around the other
spoke with its elbow whether it has washers between the flange and
elbow or not. This is a major design error. All the spokes should
have short elbows and come from opposite sides of the flange, as on
most bicycle wheels.

better yet, eliminate the design error completely - use straight pull
spokes like modern bmw motorcycle wheels.

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/WireWheels/GS-tube.jpg
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/WireWheels/ssdetail.jpg

Carl Fogel said:

Quoted message said:

Although the true believers on wreck.bike don't believe that tying
(and soldering) spokes was invented by John Starley to prevent
spokes from causing an endo by flailing around on high wheelers,
the motorcycle folks know otherwise. To make up for that, Triumph
made spoked wheels with spoke elbows unsupported for more than two
diameters from the flange. These are classic spoke breakers, like
the ones DT once made with longer elbows for easier spoke
insertion.

http://www.triumphrat.net/twins-technical-talk/75065-broken-spoke.html

Quoted message said:

The only contemporary sources that I can find _never_ mention tying
and soldering to restrain broken spokes.

You didn't look hard enough. Johns Starley invented cross laced
spoking for that purpose, high wheelers al being radially spoked
before then:

http://i12.tinypic.com/4tz3tp0.jpg

Quoted message said:

They talk about tying and soldering to strengthen the wheel. The
more plausible claim was that tying and soldering effectively
created a much bigger hub flange, while weirder claims were put
forward about restraining sideways movements.

I think that claim has been thoroughly debunked. Right after Starley
came up with that solution, Renold offered a bicycle chain that Starley
fould useful and brought out the Safety Bicycle:

http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/page/pic/?o=rzyi&pic_id=150971&v=AH&size=small

that no longer needed to tie spokes but the wheelbuilders were
resistant to lose this source of income and retold the myth of great
strength loud enough that there are yet believers in it. I heard the
anguish when "the Bicycle Wheeel" showed a measurement method that
should have put a wooden stake through its evil heart.

Quoted message said:

They also talk about reducing rattle. Long spokes on highwheelers do
rattle if crossed.

THat was gotten rid of by interleaving spokes, not by tying.

Quoted message said:

It would be strange if early inventors wanted to tie and solder
spokes to restrain them when they broke. A spoke that broke at the
elbow was already well-restrained by the crossing--anyone who's ever
had to bend and wiggle a broken-elbow spoke out of a 3x lacing knows
that.

They didn't do that, They were tied with twine and only after there
was no need for it did they switch to wire and solder to make the
added strength concept credible.

Quoted message said:

And a two-foot long spoke that breaks at the rim (a much rarer
failure) is still restrained by being woven through the other spokes
and will not be restrained much better by tying and soldering down
next to the hub.

You can't weave radial spokes!

Quoted message said:

In other words, tying and soldering wouldn't do much to restrain
already interlaced spokes when they broke. But even if it's a dumb
idea, someone might have tried it in good faith--Starley or someone
else might have tried it and the useless idea might have caught on.

You are trying to breath life into a dead animal. It's gone.

Quoted message said:

Here's the earliest patent that I've seen with tying and soldering.
The explanation sounds like nonsense, but Palmer claims that he ties
and solders for strength:

Quoted message said:

"The crossing parts of the spokes k l may be connected with wire bound
round the crossing parts and soldered. By arranging and connecting the
spokes in the manner described a direct tensile strain is put on each
spoke without any oblique strain."

http://www.google.com/patents?id=r9ZuAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA1&dq=359809

You ought to be aware by now how patents can claim all sorts of things
that don't occur or exist. Typically Rolf claimed paired spoking
prevented shimmy. It doesn't as Damon Rinard showed with
instrrumentation of frequency and rate of exitation.

Quoted message said:

Here's another earlypatent, in which Latta uses special clips
_without_ soldering for connecting spokes:

http://www.google.com/patents?id=oChZAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA62&dq=377900

Quoted message said:

Frustratingly, Latta doesn't explain why the hell he connects his
spokes.

.... and who cares?

Quoted message said:

Here's a patent by Warwick for a "double-sleeve" (44 in the diagrams)
that joins the spokes (43 in the diagram) where they cross on a
highwheeler:

Quoted message said:

"For the purpose of increasing the strength of a wheel, either front
or rear, by holding the spokes 43 in line, the double sleeve 44 is
provided..."

http://www.google.com/patents?id=ZndnAAAAEBAJ&pg=PA20&dq=384946

Quoted message said:

Like Latta, Warwick was a prolific and successful early inventor,
working for a bicycle company. Neither Latta nor Warwick mention
restraining broken spokes when they insist on lashing spokes
together.

THis is getting awfully long. What are you pursuing here?
=====================================================================

Quoted message said:

Here's Peter Gendron, another famous early inventor (Gendron Bicycle
Company), explaining that tying and soldering prevented rattling:

Quoted message said:

"The advantage of this improvement [Gendron put spokes into the hub
in some odd way] consists in thereby accomplishing the result of
causing the two spokes at their point of crossing to bind each
other... [yes, they all wrote like this]... the tension of the
spokes being sufficient to completely effect this result, so that
the spokes will not rattle when the wheel is in motion. The same
object is accomplished with the present construction of wheel by
winding or tying the spokes at their point of crossing with small
wire; but in practice this is very annoying in different ways--as,
for instance, in cleaning the wheels or in replacing the spokes."

Quoted message said:

http://www.google.com/patents?id=NIdaAAAAEBAJ&pg=PP1&dq=434146#PPP2,M1

Quoted message said:

Of course, Latta, Warwick, and Gendron could all have been unaware
of some early theory about restraining broken spokes.

Quoted message said:

But until someone finds an earlier reference to restraining broken
spokes, there's nothing but belief to support the theory that this
was the original purpose of tying and soldering. So far, all the
references are to strengthening wheels and stopping rattles.

Quoted message said:

In other words, you're the "true believer"--you keep telling us that
you vaguely remember reading somewhere that Starley tied and
soldered spokes to restrain them when they broke.

Quoted message said:

Let us know if you ever find the reference.

Quoted message said:

I keep looking, but so far I haven't found _anything_ about _anyone_
who said that he lashed spokes together for safety.

Quoted message said:

But I keep finding clear contemporary explanations that spokes were
tied and soldered for strength (probably wrong, but that was the
theory) and to stop rattling (it worked).

Quoted message said:

Here are a few more previously mentioned references.

Quoted message said:

In "Collecting & Restoring Antique Bicycles," G. Donald Adams writes
on page 61 about how the 1887 New Light Mail Roadster differed from
an 1882 Columbia in various ways, one of which was:

Quoted message said:

"Tangent spokes were used and were tied where they crossed to prvent
rattles."

Quoted message said:

***

Quoted message said:

In 1898, the author of "The Modern Bicycle and its accessories"
mentions the pros and cons of tying and soldering as strength and
explained that solderless clips might be better than heating the
spokes. But he never mentions restraining spokes as the reason:

Quoted message said:

"The majority of them [tangent-spoke wheel makers] tie their spokes
to each other where they cross. There are a great many of the makers
who do not tie them at all, there being some difference of opinion
as to the benefit derived from this treatment."

Quoted message said:

"Those in favor of tying spokes say that tying two or more [!]
spokes together at the crossing some distance above the hub shortens
the leverage from the rim and practically gives the wheel an
additional hub; that they are also stiffer against side or lateral
strain, and that the only good tangent spoke is one that is tied at
the crossing with its mates. Those who are opposed to tying spokes
say that tying them together makes them too rigid and inflexible
[!], and that the process of wiring them and soldering them together
has a tendency to crystallize the spokes at this point owing to the
heat required to solder them. This part of the argument, however,
has been met by by not wiring and soldering the spokes at the
crossing, but by pinching on them at this point a metal clamp such
as is used on the Humber wheel. The opponents of tying the spokes
assert that the very stiffness and rigidness which the wheel
possesses when the spokes are tied has a tendency to also
crystallize them at the hub flanges as well as cause them to break
[!]."

Quoted message said:

http://books.google.com/books?id=1CRyfR7JclIC&printsec=titlepage#PPA69,M1

Jobst Brandt

Quoted message said:

Carl Fogel writes:

snip

Quoted message said:

You are trying to breath life into a dead animal. It's gone.

Judging from the last 1000 posts from Carl he is living in the past. He
must be getting old so have patient with him ;-). No one is tying and
soldering spokes anymore today so there is nothing to discuss.

Lou

On 09 Feb 2008 19:35:26 GMT, [email hidden] may have

Quoted message said:

http://www.triumphrat.net/twins-technical-talk/75065-broken-spoke.html

In the photos of the hub, the problem is obvious; they made the inner
surface of the hub flat instead of using a wavy flange that would have
properly spaced the all-inner spokes. (Note that they knew they had a
problem; alternate spoke holes are counterbored to allow the
doubly-inner spokes to sit inboard of the singly-inner ones...but in
doing so, they insured that the spoke's bent end is supported only
next to the head, and not near the elbow. This is a Mistake.) A wavy
flange that supported the spokes properly could have made the concept
work reasonably well, but it's still not a good idea.

--
My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail.
Typoes are not a bug, they're a feature.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.

Werehatrack said:

On 09 Feb 2008 19:35:26 GMT, [email hidden] may have

Quoted message said:

http://www.triumphrat.net/twins-technical-talk/75065-broken-spoke.html

In the photos of the hub, the problem is obvious; they made the inner
surface of the hub flat instead of using a wavy flange that would have
properly spaced the all-inner spokes. (Note that they knew they had a
problem; alternate spoke holes are counterbored to allow the
doubly-inner spokes to sit inboard of the singly-inner ones...but in
doing so, they insured that the spoke's bent end is supported only
next to the head, and not near the elbow.

actually, i think you'll find that one spoke has a short elbow that is
snug[ish] against the flange, and its crossing neighbor has a long
elbow. and the short ones happen to be the ones that resist braking
force the most, so in both respects, fatigue is recognized as an issue
and mitigated to some extent.

now let's wait for our resident expert to deny or claim he knew about
this all along.

Quoted message said:

This is a Mistake.) A wavy
flange that supported the spokes properly could have made the concept
work reasonably well, but it's still not a good idea.

Lou Holtman said:

Quoted message said:

Carl Fogel writes:

snip

Quoted message said:

You are trying to breath life into a dead animal. It's gone.

Judging from the last 1000 posts from Carl he is living in the past. He
must be getting old so have patient with him ;-). No one is tying and
soldering spokes anymore today so there is nothing to discuss.

that's not true - i've seen them still in use around here in the san
francsico bay area. new wheels that is, not retro relics.

aka Jobst Brandt said:

Although the true believers on wreck.bike don't believe that tying
(and soldering) spokes was invented by John Starley to prevent spokes
from causing an endo by flailing around on high wheelers, the
motorcycle folks know otherwise. To make up for that, Triumph made
spoked wheels with spoke elbows unsupported for more than two
diameters from the flange. These are classic spoke breakers, like the
ones DT once made with longer elbows for easier spoke insertion.

http://www.triumphrat.net/twins-technical-talk/75065-broken-spoke.html

Did Jobst come across this discussion because his book is mentioned in it?

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

Tom Sherman said:

Quoted message said:

Although the true believers on wreck.bike don't believe that tying
(and soldering) spokes was invented by John Starley to prevent
spokes from causing an endo by flailing around on high wheelers,
the motorcycle folks know otherwise. To make up for that, Triumph
made spoked wheels with spoke elbows unsupported for more than two
diameters from the flange. These are classic spoke breakers, like
the ones DT once made with longer elbows for easier spoke
insertion.

http://www.triumphrat.net/twins-technical-talk/75065-broken-spoke.html

Quoted message said:

Did Jobst come across this discussion because his book is mentioned
in it?

The guy with the good photos, "johnc" wrote to me about this problem
on Triumph Motorcycles. I was surprised to see John Starley come to
life again with tied spokes for the original reason. You'll note that
it is only there to retain broken spokes that otherwise can get shoved
into the inner tube and cause a sudden flat tire.

Jobst Brandt

jim beam said:

Lou Holtman said:

Quoted message said:

Carl Fogel writes:

snip

Quoted message said:

You are trying to breath life into a dead animal. It's gone.

Judging from the last 1000 posts from Carl he is living in the past.
He must be getting old so have patient with him ;-). No one is tying
and soldering spokes anymore today so there is nothing to discuss.

that's not true - i've seen them still in use around here in the san
francsico bay area. new wheels that is, not retro relics.

Well, not on this side of the pond.

Lou

Lou Holtman said:

Quoted message said:

Carl Fogel writes:

snip

Quoted message said:

You are trying to breath life into a dead animal. It's gone.

Judging from the last 1000 posts from Carl he is living in the past. He
must be getting old so have patience with him ;-). No one is tying and
soldering spokes anymore today so there is nothing to discuss.

Lou

Dear Lou,

Jobst's testing of tied and soldered spokes did show that there was no
effect, but that hasn't stopped people in Europe from doing it:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos/2006/apr06/roubaix06/index.php?id=roubaix_bikes1/IMG_0003

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Quoted message said:

Carl Fogel said:

Quoted message said:

Although the true believers on wreck.bike don't believe that tying
(and soldering) spokes was invented by John Starley to prevent
spokes from causing an endo by flailing around on high wheelers,
the motorcycle folks know otherwise. To make up for that, Triumph
made spoked wheels with spoke elbows unsupported for more than two
diameters from the flange. These are classic spoke breakers, like
the ones DT once made with longer elbows for easier spoke
insertion.

http://www.triumphrat.net/twins-technical-talk/75065-broken-spoke.html

Quoted message said:

The only contemporary sources that I can find _never_ mention tying
and soldering to restrain broken spokes.

You didn't look hard enough. John Starley invented cross laced
spoking for that purpose, high wheelers al being radially spoked
before then:

Dear Jobst,

You didn't read hard enough.

I have found no contemporary references to tying and soldering tangent
spokes to restrain them for safety reasons.

In fact, you've asked me to look for them, since you can't find the
reference that you think that you remember reading decades ago.

It's silly to call people who point to the evidence "true believers"
because they don't take on belief your unsupported claim.

It's even sillier to argue that they aren't looking hard enough.

If you have a pre-1900 reference for tying and soldering tangent
spokes to restrain them in case they break, please share it with us.

No references that I can find mention that theory. They all talk about
strengthening the wheel and stopping rattles.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

"You didn't look hard enough."

"You didn't read hard enough."

"are you trying to confess that you now understand, after all this
time,
that spoke breakage is a function of bending fatigue, not "residual
stress"? or are you just looking for attention? "

"now let's wait for our resident expert to deny or claim he knew
about
this all along. "

Now gents. Would Sheldon speak that way? ;-)

"Werehatrack" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On 09 Feb 2008 19:35:26 GMT, [email hidden] may have

Quoted message said:

http://www.triumphrat.net/twins-technical-talk/75065-broken-spoke.html

In the photos of the hub, the problem is obvious; they made the inner
surface of the hub flat instead of using a wavy flange that would have
properly spaced the all-inner spokes. (Note that they knew they had a
problem; alternate spoke holes are counterbored to allow the
doubly-inner spokes to sit inboard of the singly-inner ones...but in
doing so, they insured that the spoke's bent end is supported only
next to the head, and not near the elbow. This is a Mistake.) A wavy
flange that supported the spokes properly could have made the concept
work reasonably well, but it's still not a good idea.

I saw a shimano hub with something like that, only done with machining
rather than waving.

cheers,
clive

Quoted message said:

Lou Holtman said:

Quoted message said:

Carl Fogel writes:

snip

Quoted message said:

You are trying to breath life into a dead animal. It's gone.

Judging from the last 1000 posts from Carl he is living in the past. He
must be getting old so have patience with him ;-). No one is tying and
soldering spokes anymore today so there is nothing to discuss.

Lou

Dear Lou,

Jobst's testing of tied and soldered spokes did show that there was no
effect, but that hasn't stopped people in Europe from doing it:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos/2006/apr06/roubaix06/index.php?id=roubaix_bikes1/IMG_0003

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

You are amazing Carl, digging up all this stuff ;-). How does tying and
soldering help keep a wheel straight when a spoke breaks like the
caption say?

Lou

Lou Holtman said:

Quoted message said:

Lou Holtman said:

[email hidden] wrote:
> Carl Fogel writes:
snip

> You are trying to breath life into a dead animal. It's gone.
Judging from the last 1000 posts from Carl he is living in the past. He
must be getting old so have patience with him ;-). No one is tying and
soldering spokes anymore today so there is nothing to discuss.

Lou

Dear Lou,

Jobst's testing of tied and soldered spokes did show that there was no
effect, but that hasn't stopped people in Europe from doing it:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos/2006/apr06/roubaix06/index.php?id=roubaix_bikes1/IMG_0003

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

You are amazing Carl, digging up all this stuff ;-). How does tying and
soldering help keep a wheel straight when a spoke breaks like the
caption say?

Lou

Dear Lou,

The management does not endorse the opinions expressed by the
photographer in that link.

But the management might get pretty desperate, too, if it was rolling
over cobblestones at such speeds.

The management doesn't actually do much digging. It's more just filing
under favorites.

Here, for example, is a really desperate 8-cross wheel,
tied-and-soldered at the 7th cross, with the first crossing spoke
partly covering the crossed spoke's head at the hub:
http://i2.tinypic.com/5xq520p.jpg

Imagine lacing up that ~80-spoke 8-cross beast and then tying and
soldering all those crossings. It's no wonder that safety bicycles
with their itty-bitty wheels and their low spoke-counts wiped out the
highwheelers.

The 8-cross from another angle:

http://www.eriding.net/media/photos/transport/vintage_bikes/040930_cbr_mp_his_trans_vb_518.jpg

A similar tangent laced hub from the same company with tying and
soldering:

http://www.eriding.net/media/photos/transport/vintage_bikes/040930_cbr_mp_his_trans_vb_545.jpg

Here are some more typical highwheeler lacings, radial with what were
called nutted spokes, from the same site:

http://www.eriding.net/media/photos/transport/vintage_bikes/040930_amoore_mp_his_trans_vb_025.jpg

http://www.eriding.net/media/photos/transport/vintage_bikes/040930_amoore_mp_his_trans_vb_007.jpg

http://www.eriding.net/media/photos/transport/vintage_bikes/040930_amoore_mp_his_trans_vb_014.jpg

Radial lacing was quite popular until the highwheelers vanished.

Three radials and a fourth tangent with tied-and-soldered spokes on a
site with lots and lots of pictures of the details:

http://www.hochrad.info/hochradseite/hochradbasic/hochrad%20allerlei%20sammlung.htm#hocheins

Radial wheels were strong enough, tying and soldering probably made no
real difference, there were some patent issues about using tangent
spoke lacing, and radials were much simpler to build. Even with
spokecalc, I'd hate to try to calculate spoke lengths for a 54-inch
8-cross on the monster-wide hub and narrow rim of a highwheeler--it
must have been tricky with nothing but pencils and paper.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel