Mavic MA3 v Open Pro

MA3 rims are wider.

Quoted message said:

Other than price and a couple of onces what is the
difference between these to rims. I can't seem to justify
the extra cost for the Open Pros just for the small weight
difference. Are there any performance, durability or other
issues that I am missing.

Thank you. /Dave

David M. Grey said:

Other than price and a couple of onces what is the
difference between these to rims. I can't seem to justify
the extra cost for the Open Pros just for the small weight
difference. Are there any performance, durability or other
issues that I am missing.

Go read this thread in alt.mountain-bike From: "Joseph
Jozwik" <[email hidden]> Newsgroups: alt.mountain-bike
Subject: Nice Crash Helmet Cam Message-ID:
<[email hidden]>

Mavic rims SUCK and so does their customer service.

"David M. Grey" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Other than price and a couple of onces what is the
difference

between

Quoted message said:

these to rims. I can't seem to justify the extra
cost for the

Open Pros

Quoted message said:

just for the small weight difference. Are there any

performance,

Quoted message said:

durability or other issues that I am missing.

I believe that Andrew Muzi and some others have reported
problems with the eyelets on the MA3. I built 3 wheels with
the MA3s and found them difficult to work with -- binding at
the eyelet/nipple interface even with oil and difficulty
getting them true. I have no axe to grind with Mavic and
used many of the MA2s, which were a superior rim and were a
breeze to build. I find Open Pros easy to build, and they
seem to hold up just as well as the MA3s -- and they have
spoke sockets and not just grommets (at least they used to).
I prefer sockets (or "double eyelets"😉 because they are
easier to build and if you get cracking around the spoke
hole, then it takes a lot more to pull the socket through
the rim than to pull through a single eyelet. This was an
issue for me on a recent ride on some old Open 4CDs. If I
wanted an MA2-like rim, however, I would get a Torelli
Master. -- Jay Beattie.

sittingduck said:

Mavic rims SUCK

A bit of a generalisation. Most people are very happy
with them.

and so does their customer service.

They'd probably call it Gallic charm ;-)

In article <[email hidden]>,

David M. Grey said:

Other than price and a couple of onces what is the
difference between these to rims. I can't seem to justify
the extra cost for the Open Pros just for the small weight
difference. Are there any performance, durability or other
issues that I am missing.

I like the eyelets better on the Open Pro, although I build
and ride on both of them. The MA3 eyelets don't seem to
handle high spoke tension as well.

David M. Grey said:

Other than price and a couple of onces what is the
difference between these to rims.

Well, if you buy 2 rims, you can get OpenPros at nashbar for
$43 (silver) right now (20% off all orders > $50). Don't
forget to use discount code W191, for an extra 10%. The
markups on Open Pro rims are outragoues, IMHO.

The OpenPro's up into a year or two ago had problems with
eyelets separating from the rim, and or "pings" (e.g. noisy
rims.) I believe this problem has been fixed, but I would
stay away from older used or NOS Open Pro rims.

The MA3 is a wider rim with a lower profile - the OpenPro is
a thinner and lighter rim with a higher profile. I don't
know about you, but there are very few clincher rims for
sale that weigh less than 470g, so I think the Open Pro's
are something pretty special.

For $60 a rim, it's a crock that an OpenPro rim comes with
an 8-inch commercial stickered onto the surface of the rim.

- Don Gillies San Diego, CA

Donald Gillies said:

Well, if you buy 2 rims, you can get OpenPros at nashbar
for $43 (silver) right now (20% off all orders > $50).
Don't forget to use discount code W191, for an extra 10%.
The markups on Open Pro rims are outragoues, IMHO.

The OpenPro's up into a year or two ago had problems with
eyelets separating from the rim, and or "pings" (e.g.
noisy rims.) I believe this problem has been fixed, but I
would stay away from older used or NOS Open Pro rims.

How do we know that the Nashbar rims are not older NOS?

Wayne

The Open Pros have sockets (also known as double eyelets)
which are inserts at the spoke hole that spread the spoke
load to the outer wall of the rim as well as the inner. The
MA3s have only single eyelets on the inner wall of the rim.
In theory, if a rim is properly designed, with more material
on the inner wall, this isn't necessarly a problem. The Sun
ME14A is one single eyelet rim with a decent reputation. But
this is not always the case. Some rims have a habit oof
cracking at the spoke holes.

In my experience, rims with single eyelets crack more often
than similar rims with no eyelets at all. Double eyelet rims
are generally superior.

There are other options for double eyelet rims. Check out
the Ambrosio Excellence, Torelli Master, Fir Zenith, even
Alex R390 (currently $20 at Nashbar).

-Bruce-

"David M. Grey" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Other than price and a couple of onces what is the
difference between these to rims. I can't seem to justify
the extra cost for the Open Pros just for the small weight
difference. Are there any performance, durability or other
issues that I am missing.

Thank you. /Dave

Quoted message said:

"David M. Grey" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Other than price and a couple of onces what is the
difference

between

Quoted message said:

these to rims. I can't seem to justify the extra
cost for the

Open Pros

Quoted message said:

just for the small weight difference. Are there any

performance,

Quoted message said:

durability or other issues that I am missing.

Jay Beattie said:

I believe that Andrew Muzi and some others have reported
problems with the eyelets on the MA3. I built 3 wheels
with the MA3s and found them difficult to work with --
binding at the eyelet/nipple interface even with oil and
difficulty getting them true. I have no axe to grind with
Mavic and used many of the MA2s, which were a superior rim
and were a breeze to build. I find Open Pros easy to
build, and they seem to hold up just as well as the MA3s
-- and they have spoke sockets and not just grommets (at
least they used to). I prefer sockets (or "double
eyelets"😉 because they are easier to build and if you get
cracking around the spoke hole, then it takes a lot more
to pull the socket through the rim than to pull through a
single eyelet. This was an issue for me on a recent ride
on some old Open 4CDs. If I wanted an MA2-like rim,
however, I would get a Torelli Master. -- Jay Beattie.

I think that (spokes pulling through MA3) may have been
Peter about a week ago. We passed on that rim and went with
Montreals for a few years instead. Now we're mostly Velocity
AeroHead, AeroHead OC (offset)rear. I have built some
Torelli without any problems.

--
Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org Open every day since 1
April, 1971

dmgry-<< Other than price and a couple of onces what is the
difference between these to rims. >><BR><BR>

Single eyelet that in my experience, pulls out with way too
much frequency-for the MA-3. I would stay away from this
rim. Torelli Expert or Master. Velocity Aero are all good,
lower price choices for a good, not heavy, rim.

Peter Chisholm Vecchio's Bicicletteria 1833 Pearl St.
Boulder, CO, 80302
(303)440-3535 vecchios.comvecchios.comOpen ↗ "Ruote convenzionali
costruite eccezionalmente bene"

Donald Gillies said:

Well, if you buy 2 rims, you can get OpenPros at nashbar
for $43 (silver) right now (20% off all orders > $50).
Don't forget to use discount code W191, for an extra 10%.
The markups on Open Pro rims are outragoues, IMHO.

The OpenPro's up into a year or two ago had problems with
eyelets separating from the rim, and or "pings" (e.g.
noisy rims.) I believe this problem has been fixed, but I
would stay away from older used or NOS Open Pro rims.

The MA3 is a wider rim with a lower profile - the OpenPro
is a thinner and lighter rim with a higher profile. I
don't know about you, but there are very few clincher rims
for sale that weigh less than 470g, so I think the Open
Pro's are something pretty special.

For $60 a rim, it's a crock that an OpenPro rim comes
with an 8-inch commercial stickered onto the surface of
the rim.

Out of interest, what are the differences between an OpenPro
and my old Open4CD rims? They look superficially similar.

Zog The Undeniable said:

Out of interest, what are the differences between an
OpenPro and my old=

=20

Quoted message said:

Open4CD rims? They look superficially similar.

They are very similar, but the CD stands for "Couche Dur"
(hard anodized)=
=2E

The Open Pro has a welded joint and a machined braking
surace=20 ("S.U.P."=3DSoud=E9 Machine Proces)

This is a good-news/bad news technology: Machined/welded
rims give=20 smooth braking even when new, but the lifespan
of the braking surface is =

reduced, an issue for high mileage riders, especially those
who ride in=20 wet, sloppy conditions.

Sheldon "Acronymes Fran=E7ais" Brown +----------------------------------------------------------
+
| Persecution is not an original feature in any religion;
| | but it is always the strongly marked feature of all |
| religions established by law. | Take away the law-
| establishment, and every religion | re-assumes its
| original benignity. | Thomas Paine -- The Rights of
| Man, 1791 |
+----------------------------------------------------------+
Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts Phone 617-244-
9772 FAX 617-244-1041 harriscyclery.comharriscyclery.comOpen ↗ Hard-to-find
parts shipped Worldwide captainbike.comcaptainbike.comOpen ↗
sheldonbrown.comsheldonbrown.comOpen ↗

Sheldon Brown said:

Zog The Undeniable said:

Out of interest, what are the differences between an
OpenPro and my old Open4CD rims? They look superficially
similar.

They are very similar, but the CD stands for "Couche Dur"
(hard anodized).

The Open Pro has a welded joint and a machined braking
surace ("S.U.P."=Soudé Machine Proces)

This is a good-news/bad news technology: Machined/welded
rims give smooth braking even when new, but the lifespan
of the braking surface is reduced, an issue for high
mileage riders, especially those who ride in wet, sloppy
conditions.

i'm surprised you say that about lifespan sheldon! if an old
rim is say 1mm wall thickness unmachined and a new rim is
say 1mm wall thickness after machining, where's the problem?
if the wall is thinner, that's a "design feature", it's not
a function of machining.

Quoted message said:

Sheldon "Acronymes Français" Brown +---------------------------------------------------
-------+
| Persecution is not an original feature in any religion;
| | but it is always the strongly marked feature of all |
| religions established by law. | Take away the law-
| establishment, and every religion | re-assumes its
| original benignity. | Thomas Paine -- The Rights of
| Man, 1791 |
+---------------------------------------------------------
-+ Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts Phone 617-244-
9772 FAX 617-244-1041 harriscyclery.comharriscyclery.comOpen ↗ Hard-to-
find parts shipped Worldwide captainbike.comcaptainbike.comOpen ↗
sheldonbrown.comsheldonbrown.comOpen ↗

Old Crow said:

I'm surprised you say that about lifespan Sheldon! If an
old rim is say 1mm wall thickness unmachined and a new rim
is say 1mm wall thickness after machining, where's the
problem? If the wall is thinner, that's a "design
feature", it's not a function of machining.

The problem is that unmachined rims are 1.5mm and machined
rims are under and over 1mm.

Jobst Brandt [email hidden]

Quoted message said:

Old Crow said:

I'm surprised you say that about lifespan Sheldon! If an
old rim is say 1mm wall thickness unmachined and a new rim
is say 1mm wall thickness after machining, where's the
problem? If the wall is thinner, that's a "design
feature", it's not a function of machining.

The problem is that unmachined rims are 1.5mm and machined
rims are under and over 1mm.

i accept that they may be thinner, but it's a "design
feature", not a penalty of machining. even mavic aren't dumb
enough to _not_ allow for material loss.

jim beam said:

Quoted message said:

Old Crow said:

I'm surprised you say that about lifespan Sheldon! If an
old rim is say 1mm wall thickness unmachined and a new
rim is say 1mm wall thickness after machining, where's
the problem? If the wall is thinner, that's a "design
feature", it's not a function of machining.

The problem is that unmachined rims are 1.5mm and
machined rims are under and over 1mm.

i accept that they may be thinner, but it's a "design
feature", not a penalty of machining.

As has been previously discussed ad nauseum, the pre-
machined rimwalls maybe extruded to 1.5 mm thick, but the
nature of extrusion is such that the rim wall isn't
straight. When it's bent into a hoop and machined flat,
there are areas of the rim where the wall is thicker (> 1
mm) and thinner (< 1 mm). There's no way to tell where the
thin areas are, and this becomes a problem as the rim wears
due to breaking.

Quoted message said:

even mavic aren't dumb enough to _not_ allow for
material loss.

Don't be too sure. Threre's an awful lot of other dumb stuff
they do with rims.

Tim McNamara said:

jim beam said:

Quoted message said:

Old Crow writes:

>I'm surprised you say that about lifespan Sheldon! If an
>old rim is say 1mm wall thickness unmachined and a new
>rim is say 1mm wall thickness after machining, where's
>the problem? If the wall is thinner, that's a "design
>feature", it's not a function of machining.

The problem is that unmachined rims are 1.5mm and
machined rims are under and over 1mm.

i accept that they may be thinner, but it's a "design
feature", not a penalty of machining.

As has been previously discussed ad nauseum, the pre-
machined rimwalls maybe extruded to 1.5 mm thick, but the
nature of extrusion is such that the rim wall isn't
straight. When it's bent into a hoop and machined flat,
there are areas of the rim where the wall is thicker (> 1
mm) and thinner (< 1 mm). There's no way to tell where the
thin areas are, and this becomes a problem as the rim
wears due to breaking.

with respect, i don't see how this "problem" if of greater
magnitude than an unmachined rim with an uneven surface
causing grabbing or not being at full efficiency because the
pad and the rim surface haven't worn together yet. both are
potential killers right out of the box. a rim failing
because it's worn requires miles. miles during which the
rider should be inspecting for wear. just like the _brake_
disks on your car.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

even mavic aren't dumb enough to _not_ allow for
material loss.

Don't be too sure. Threre's an awful lot of other dumb
stuff they do with rims.

this is flame bait, but i'll bite anyway. what do /you/
think they do that's warrants the description "an awful lot
of other dumb stuff"?

jim beam said:

Tim McNamara said:

jim beam said:

[email hidden] wrote:

>Old Crow writes:
>
>>I'm surprised you say that about lifespan Sheldon! If
>>an old rim is say 1mm wall thickness unmachined and a
>>new rim is say 1mm wall thickness after machining,
>>where's the problem? If the wall is thinner, that's a
>>"design feature", it's not a function of machining.
>
>The problem is that unmachined rims are 1.5mm and
>machined rims are under and over 1mm.

i accept that they may be thinner, but it's a "design
feature", not a penalty of machining.

Yes, and if you leave a bug in software long enough it too
becomes a "feature."

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

As has been previously discussed ad nauseum, the pre-
machined rimwalls maybe extruded to 1.5 mm thick, but the
nature of extrusion is such that the rim wall isn't
straight. When it's bent into a hoop and machined flat,
there are areas of the rim where the wall is thicker (> 1
mm) and thinner (< 1 mm). There's no way to tell where
the thin areas are, and this becomes a problem as the rim
wears due to breaking.

with respect, i don't see how this "problem" if of greater
magnitude than an unmachined rim with an uneven surface
causing grabbing or not being at full efficiency because
the pad and the rim surface haven't worn together yet.
both are potential killers right out of the box. a rim
failing because it's worn requires miles. miles during
which the rider should be inspecting for wear. just like
the _brake_ disks on your car.

No, because the two sides of the unmachined extrusion will
be the same width apart (the extrusion undulates at a
constant width), and the brake pads will track this because
they are not rigidly fixed in place. This wears the
sidewall pretty evenly, allowing a pretty good estimate of
when to replace the rim. The machining process doesn't
follow the undulations in the extrusion, which wears the
sidewall unevenly resulting in thinner spots; this results
in the rider being unable to gauge the sidewall wear at any
given point.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

even mavic aren't dumb enough to _not_ allow for
material loss.

Don't be too sure. Threre's an awful lot of other dumb
stuff they do with rims.

this is flame bait, but i'll bite anyway. what do /you/
think they do that's warrants the description "an awful
lot of other dumb stuff"?

Flame bait for whom? Surely not you, in this circumstance.
But let's scroll through the list one more time (as my views
are hardly hidden from the newsgroup on this topic):
eliminating nipple sockets and going to a simple ferrule
design, anodizing, the goofy design of the nipple holders
inside Cosmic rims, machining the sidewalls, etc.

We've gone from rims with good reliability to a bunch of
"features" that serve to lessen service life and line the
pockets of Mavic's owners by driving up retail price two- or
threefold- obfuscated and abetted by the apologists who
claim that rims fail because spoke tension is too high/too
low, tire inflation pressure is too high/too low, spokes are
too thick/too thin, spoke patterns that are radial/not
radial, and on and on. Instead of a rim lasting 20,000 miles
it lasts 2,000- and often weighs more than the older, more
durable rims.

On Sun, 16 May 2004 23:06:57 -0500, Tim McNamara
<[email hidden]> wrote:

[snip]

Quoted message said:

But let's scroll through the list one more time (as my
views are hardly hidden from the newsgroup on this topic):
eliminating nipple sockets and going to a simple ferrule
design, anodizing, the goofy design of the nipple holders
inside Cosmic rims, machining the sidewalls, etc.

We've gone from rims with good reliability to a bunch of
"features" that serve to lessen service life and line the
pockets of Mavic's owners by driving up retail price two-
or threefold- obfuscated and abetted by the apologists who
claim that rims fail because spoke tension is too high/too
low, tire inflation pressure is too high/too low, spokes
are too thick/too thin, spoke patterns that are radial/not
radial, and on and on. Instead of a rim lasting 20,000
miles it lasts 2,000- and often weighs more than the older,
more durable rims.

Dear Tim,

[Fogel leans in to check the sign and takes a slow windup.]

So those are some of the things that you consider mistakes
in how Mavic makes rims.

[Here comes the gentle underhand batting-practiice pitch.]

Can you give us some examples of other rim brands that avoid
these mistakes and a thumbnail explanation of what's going
on? That is, what's this socket/ferrule business and what's
goofy about those nipple holders? Are the Mavic prices
driving all rim prices up, or do other manufacturers sell
better rims at much lower prices?

[Slow-pitch softball questions released! McNamara's
presumably non-anodized aluminum bat should soon begin
happily whacking them out of the park.]

Carl "35 or 36 spokes, I forget which" Fogel