hub flange spacing and dish

Nicholas Grieco said:

Thinking about dish and wheel strength, I started comparing Shimano's
current hubs to one another. I was surprised to find sizeable differences
in both hub flange width, and offset on the axle, according to their
specifications.

Below, I've listed the dimensions of each hub from their website, for the
sake of discussion. Which of these do you think achieves the best
compromise between maximizing flange width, and minimizing dish? (This is
independent of other hub differentiations of course, like axle length,
bearing type, engagement mechanism, etc.)

Regards,
Nicholas

Dura-Ace 7800
20.55 center to flange- right
36.35 center to flange- left
56.9 flange width
7.9 offset
N/A spoke hole circle

Dura-Ace 7700
21.1 center to flange- right
36.9 center to flange- left
58.0 flange width
7.9 offset
44.0 spoke hole circle

Ultegra 6500
20.5 center to flange- right
32.5 center to flange- left
53.0 flange width
6.0 offset
45.0 spoke hole circle

XTR M950
23.2 center to flange- right
26.8 center to flange- left
50.0 flange width
1.8 offset
45.0 spoke hole circle

Deore XT M760
21.75 center to flange- right
37.55 center to flange- left
59.3 flange width
7.9 offset
45.0 spoke hole circle

Deore LX M570
23.2 center to flange- right
36.8 center to flange- left
60.0 flange width
6.8 offset
45.0 spoke hole circle

Deore LX R080
22.7 center to flange- right
37.9 center to flange- left
60.6 flange width
7.6 offset
45.0 spoke hole circle

Deore M510
23.2 center to flange- right
18.55 center to flange- left
41.75 flange width
2.325 offset
45.0 spoke hole circle

If the above specifications are true in real life products, then the XTR M950 will best meet your combined goals.
However, I am sure that at the very least, two of the numbers for the Deore M510 are incorrect on the Shimano site. (Flange width, center to flange - left, and offset are all incorrectly listed) I wouldn't trust all the numbers listed on the Shimano site as accurate and trustworthy for selection of product. Certainly, some of their numbers, like spoke hole circles are correct.

I said:

Quoted message said:

Thinking about dish and wheel strength, I started comparing
Shimano's current hubs to one another. I was surprised to find
sizeable differences in both hub flange width, and offset on the
axle, according to their specifications.

Below, I've listed the dimensions of each hub from their website,
for the sake of discussion. Which of these do you think achieves
the best compromise between maximizing flange width, and mini-
mizing dish? (This is independent of other hub differentiations of
course, like axle length, bearing type, engagement mechanism, etc.)

[hub dimensions snipped]

daveornee said:

If the above specifications are true in real life products, then the
XTR M950 will best meet your combined goals.

So you're thinking that improved l-r spoke tension balance is more
important than the relative narrowness of the flange spacing. The M950
is 3mm narrow than the 6500, and 8mm (!) narrower than the 7700.

Quoted message said:

However, I am sure that at the very least, two of the numbers for the
Deore M510 are incorrect on the Shimano site. (Flange width, center to
flange - left, and offset are all incorrectly listed)

Yeah, that doesn't make much sense, does it! Thanks for catching that.

Quoted message said:

I wouldn't trust
all the numbers listed on the Shimano site as accurate and trustworthy
for selection of product. Certainly, some of their numbers, like spoke
hole circles are correct.

Nicholas Grieco wrote in message ...

Quoted message said:

Thinking about dish and wheel strength, I started comparing Shimano's
current hubs to one another. I was surprised to find sizeable differences
in both hub flange width, and offset on the axle, according to their
specifications.

Below, I've listed the dimensions of each hub from their website, for the
sake of discussion. Which of these do you think achieves the best
compromise between maximizing flange width, and minimizing dish? (This is
independent of other hub differentiations of course, like axle length,
bearing type, engagement mechanism, etc.)

It is the centre to flange dimension is the most important, lateral bracing
is most effective when this is greater.

Trevor

quote='Nicholas Grieco'I said:

Quoted message said:

Thinking about dish and wheel strength, I started comparing
Shimano's current hubs to one another. I was surprised to find
sizeable differences in both hub flange width, and offset on the
axle, according to their specifications.

Below, I've listed the dimensions of each hub from their website,
for the sake of discussion. Which of these do you think achieves
the best compromise between maximizing flange width, and mini-
mizing dish? (This is independent of other hub differentiations of
course, like axle length, bearing type, engagement mechanism, etc.)

[hub dimensions snipped]

daveornee said:

If the above specifications are true in real life products, then the
XTR M950 will best meet your combined goals.

So you're thinking that improved l-r spoke tension balance is more
important than the relative narrowness of the flange spacing. The M950
is 3mm narrow than the 6500, and 8mm (!) narrower than the 7700.

Quoted message said:

However, I am sure that at the very least, two of the numbers for the
Deore M510 are incorrect on the Shimano site. (Flange width, center to
flange - left, and offset are all incorrectly listed)

Yeah, that doesn't make much sense, does it! Thanks for catching that.

Quoted message said:

I wouldn't trust
all the numbers listed on the Shimano site as accurate and trustworthy
for selection of product. Certainly, some of their numbers, like spoke
hole circles are correct.

[/quote]

Well, as I stated from one example, Shimano's site doesn't list correct dimensions. I have built and currently ride and own XTR M950 and DURA ACE FH-7700 wheels. The side to side spoke tension balance is important. The spoke support angle is also important. I can't compare apples to apples on the wheels I have because I used an offset spoke bed wheel for the XTR-M950 rear. It has exactly the same spoke tension on every spoke.
I can compare the hubs and tell you that they don't match Shimano's listed specifications. I can't get the calipers in to make exact measurements, but, by eyeballing them, I would say that the XTR M-950 hub flanges are wider spaced than DURA ACE by a mm or two and they are also a slight larger amount wider spaced than Ultegra.
All this amounts to is spoke support angle and spoke load sharing. A well built wheel with no dish and adequate spoke support angle will be the most reliable.

Trevor Jeffrey said:

It is the centre to flange dimension is the most important, lateral bracing
is most effective when this is greater.

Trevor

....as long as the spokes are tight enough to "never" go slack?

Dave Ornee said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

However, I am sure that at the very least, two of the numbers for
the Deore M510 are incorrect on the Shimano site. (Flange width,
center to flange - left, and offset are all incorrectly listed)
I wouldn't trust all the numbers listed on the Shimano site as
accurate and trustworthy for selection of product. Certainly, some
of their numbers, like spoke hole circles are correct.

and continues:

Quoted message said:

Well, as I stated from one example, Shimano's site doesn't list correct
dimensions. I have built and currently ride and own XTR M950 and
DURA ACE FH-7700 wheels. The side to side spoke tension balance
is important. The spoke support angle is also important. I can't com-
pare apples to apples on the wheels I have because I used an offset
spoke bed wheel for the XTR-M950 rear. It has exactly the same
spoke tension on every spoke.

I can compare the hubs and tell you that they don't match Shimano's
listed specifications. I can't get the calipers in to make exact measure-
ments, but, by eyeballing them, I would say that the XTR M-950 hub
flanges are wider spaced than DURA ACE by a mm or two and they
are also a slight larger amount wider spaced than Ultegra.

If the published dimensions are suspect, I'll see if I can get the actual
dimensions this week and get back to the group.

Quoted message said:

All this amounts to is spoke support angle and spoke load sharing. A
well built wheel with no dish and adequate spoke support angle will be
the most reliable.

--
daveornee

dianne_1234 wrote in message ...

Quoted message said:

Trevor Jeffrey said:

It is the centre to flange dimension is the most important, lateral

bracing

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

is most effective when this is greater.

Trevor

...as long as the spokes are tight enough to "never" go slack?

Impossible to attain in a correctly built wheel. Not to go slack during
normal service conditions is the correct description.

Trevor