Mavic Open Pro & Open Pro CD

RS said:

From practical experience any advantage or disadvantages to the slightly
more expensive Open Pro CD rim vs. the standard Open Pro rim?  One
LBS suggested the CD version didn't brake as well, other than that I can't
imagine a problem with the CD version?

CD, meaning hard anodizing, can be prone to cracks around the eyelets
due to that hard anodizing. Treated and then the eyelets are
installed, which causes micro cracks, which 'can' lead to p[remature
cracking. BUT look at DT, MUCH better rim, the 1.1, double eyelet.

Braking, with machined sidewalls on both, is a non issue.

Qui si parla Campagnolo said:

RS said:

From practical experience any advantage or disadvantages to the slightly
more expensive Open Pro CD rim vs. the standard Open Pro rim? �One
LBS suggested the CD version didn't brake as well, other than that I can't
imagine a problem with the CD version?

CD, meaning hard anodizing, can be prone to cracks around the eyelets
due to that hard anodizing.

yeah, people post pics of their cracked cd rims here all the time. not.

this is underinformed presumptive jobstian [censored]. peter, you should
know better by now. rim cracking is due to excess spoke tension and the
fundamental problem of using extrusions to make the rim hoop -
[anisotropy]. observe manufacturer spec on spoke tension and you'll
have no more problem that you would with any other open pro rim.

Quoted message said:

Treated and then the eyelets are
installed, which causes micro cracks, which 'can' lead to p[remature
cracking. BUT look at DT, MUCH better rim, the 1.1, double eyelet.

Braking, with machined sidewalls on both, is a non issue.

RS said:

From practical experience any advantage or disadvantages to the slightly
more expensive Open Pro CD rim vs. the standard Open Pro rim? One
LBS suggested the CD version didn't brake as well, other than that I can't
imagine a problem with the CD version?

from practical experience, they brake just fine - don't listen to the
fud you get on newsgroups propagated by people that criticize something
they've never used. no other disadvantage - they're no more susceptible
to cracking than any other open pro rim when the spokes are
over-tensioned. make sure therefore that the manufacturer's spoke
tension spec is properly observed.

other than that, if you're seeking wet weather wear resistance, skip
ahead to the ceramic rim - the cd does increase wear resistance, but not
hugely, and it does wear off. the ceramics are virtually wear proof.

"jim beam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
| Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
| > On Jun 17, 11:23?pm, RS <[email hidden]> wrote:
| >> From practical experience any advantage or disadvantages to the
slightly
| >> more expensive Open Pro CD rim vs. the standard Open Pro rim? ?One
| >> LBS suggested the CD version didn't brake as well, other than that I
can't
| >> imagine a problem with the CD version?
| >
| > CD, meaning hard anodizing, can be prone to cracks around the eyelets
| > due to that hard anodizing.
|
| yeah, people post pics of their cracked cd rims here all the time. not.
|
| this is underinformed presumptive jobstian [censored]. peter, you should
| know better by now. rim cracking is due to excess spoke tension and the
| fundamental problem of using extrusions to make the rim hoop -
| [anisotropy]. observe manufacturer spec on spoke tension and you'll
| have no more problem that you would with any other open pro rim.
|
|
| > Treated and then the eyelets are
| > installed, which causes micro cracks, which 'can' lead to p[remature
| > cracking. BUT look at DT, MUCH better rim, the 1.1, double eyelet.
| >
| > Braking, with machined sidewalls on both, is a non issue.

First, the question wasn't Mavic vs DT. Second, the DT hasn't been around
long enough to know if it will have issues. Third, rim cracking has, in
fact, been a major, not minor problem, ever since the hard anodizing came
into vogue. Whether there are other factors at play is a legit question,
since the hard anodizing may have come at the same time as subtle changes in
rim alloys. One thing's certain- back in the day, we'd see many wheels fail
due to denting. Denting is almost never seen with modern rims, but cracking
is. I think we've traded one problem for another, and I don't think it's
just anodizing at fault, but it's likely a contributor.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

In article <[email hidden]>,

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

"jim beam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
| Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
| > On Jun 17, 11:23?pm, RS <[email hidden]> wrote:
| >> From practical experience any advantage or disadvantages to the
slightly
| >> more expensive Open Pro CD rim vs. the standard Open Pro rim? ?One
| >> LBS suggested the CD version didn't brake as well, other than that I
can't
| >> imagine a problem with the CD version?
| >
| > CD, meaning hard anodizing, can be prone to cracks around the eyelets
| > due to that hard anodizing.
|
| yeah, people post pics of their cracked cd rims here all the time. not.
|
| this is underinformed presumptive jobstian [censored]. peter, you should
| know better by now. rim cracking is due to excess spoke tension and the
| fundamental problem of using extrusions to make the rim hoop -
| [anisotropy]. observe manufacturer spec on spoke tension and you'll
| have no more problem that you would with any other open pro rim.
|
|
| > Treated and then the eyelets are
| > installed, which causes micro cracks, which 'can' lead to p[remature
| > cracking. BUT look at DT, MUCH better rim, the 1.1, double eyelet.
| >
| > Braking, with machined sidewalls on both, is a non issue.

First, the question wasn't Mavic vs DT. Second, the DT hasn't been around
long enough to know if it will have issues. Third, rim cracking has, in
fact, been a major, not minor problem, ever since the hard anodizing came
into vogue. Whether there are other factors at play is a legit question,
since the hard anodizing may have come at the same time as subtle changes in
rim alloys. One thing's certain- back in the day, we'd see many wheels fail
due to denting. Denting is almost never seen with modern rims, but cracking
is. I think we've traded one problem for another, and I don't think it's
just anodizing at fault, but it's likely a contributor.

What you think is not backed by evidence.
How about finding some evidence that rim
alloys have changed in such a way as to
promote cracking, then come back with it.
Otherwise you are promoting a brand new
unsubstantiated rumor among all the others
floating around here.

--
Michael Press

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

"jim beam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]...
| Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
| > On Jun 17, 11:23?pm, RS <[email hidden]> wrote:
| >> From practical experience any advantage or disadvantages to the
slightly
| >> more expensive Open Pro CD rim vs. the standard Open Pro rim? ?One
| >> LBS suggested the CD version didn't brake as well, other than that I
can't
| >> imagine a problem with the CD version?
| >
| > CD, meaning hard anodizing, can be prone to cracks around the eyelets
| > due to that hard anodizing.
|
| yeah, people post pics of their cracked cd rims here all the time.  not.
|
| this is underinformed presumptive jobstian [censored].  peter, you should
| know better by now.  rim cracking is due to excess spoke tension and the
| fundamental problem of using extrusions to make the rim hoop -
| [anisotropy].  observe manufacturer spec on spoke tension and you'll
| have no more problem that you would with any other open pro rim.
|
|
| > Treated and then the eyelets are
| > installed, which causes micro cracks, which 'can' lead to p[remature
| > cracking. BUT look at DT, MUCH better rim, the 1.1, double eyelet.
| >
| > Braking, with machined sidewalls on both, is a non issue.

First, the question wasn't Mavic vs DT. Second, the DT hasn't been around
long enough to know if it will have issues. Third, rim cracking has, in
fact, been a major, not minor problem, ever since the hard anodizing came
into vogue. Whether there are other factors at play is a legit question,
since the hard anodizing may have come at the same time as subtle changesin
rim alloys. One thing's certain- back in the day, we'd see many wheels fail
due to denting. Denting is almost never seen with modern rims, but cracking
is. I think we've traded one problem for another, and I don't think it's
just anodizing at fault, but it's likely a contributor.

--Mike--     Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReactionBicycles.com

We have been building with DT for almost a year, probably in excess of
200 rims, w/o any problem whatsoever. Small sample to be sure but.....

As for the OP and if some have an issue with Jobst, they should say
so..I guess he did. He has more problem with Jobst that I have with
shimano and sram.

Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
<snip for clarity>

Quoted message said:

I don't think it's
just anodizing at fault, but it's likely a contributor.

given that there's no correlation between anodizing crack orientation
and rim crack orientation, saying that anodizing is "likely a
contributor" is about as useful as saying that vegetarianism is "likely
a contributor" to bicycle/suv impact fatalities. some dead bike riders
may indeed have been vegetarians, but it made no difference to their
mortality when the suv entered the equation.

Tom Kunich said:

If you look at the specifications you'll see that nothing has changed
in the rim material since the mid-80's. What HAS changed is that they
no longer even try to make "light" rims as they did in the 60's and 70's.

400 grams is a light rim these days. Compare that to the 265 grams from
1980.

Are the 1980s rims you have in mind clincher or tubular rims?
265g was about the weight of a Fiamme yellow label tubular rim.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought many
tubular rims of that era were not extruded but rather formed
from sheet. I have noticed a seam running all the way around
the rim (in the middle of the surface the tire glues to) on
Mavic tubular rims from the 70s and 80s.

Tom Ace

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

Quoted message said:

Are the 1980s rims you have in mind clincher or tubular rims?
265g was about the weight of a Fiamme yellow label tubular rim.

I have a couple of 32 spoke Japanese clincher rims that are 270 grams and
after weighing them they are actually 265. There were Italian clincher rims
that were lighter. For instance - Mavic made a 280 gram and on a new mold
they were considerably lighter.

Quoted message said:

Tom Kunich said:

If you look at the specifications you'll see that nothing has changed
in the rim material since the mid-80's. What HAS changed is that they
no longer even try to make "light" rims as they did in the 60's and 70's.
400 grams is a light rim these days. Compare that to the 265 grams from
1980.

Tom Ace said:

Are the 1980s rims you have in mind clincher or tubular rims?
265g was about the weight of a Fiamme yellow label tubular rim.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought many
tubular rims of that era were not extruded but rather formed
from sheet. I have noticed a seam running all the way around
the rim (in the middle of the surface the tire glues to) on
Mavic tubular rims from the 70s and 80s.

AFAIK Mavic, Fiamme, SuperChamp Weinmann etc were all extruded and
pinned at the seam opposite the valve with a shaped insert inside.

(even Harlan Meyer's ultralight sub-200g Hi-E rims were indeed extruded
and wrapped then seamed with rivets. There's one near me right now as it
happens)

The lightest clincher of the classic era AFAIK was the 370g Araya CTL.
--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

Quoted message said:

"Tom Ace" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Are the 1980s rims you have in mind clincher or tubular rims?
265g was about the weight of a Fiamme yellow label tubular rim.

Tom Kunich said:

I have a couple of 32 spoke Japanese clincher rims that are 270 grams
and after weighing them they are actually 265. There were Italian
clincher rims that were lighter. For instance - Mavic made a 280 gram
and on a new mold they were considerably lighter.

270g clincher? Which model?
In 700C size, 1980s books show Araya lists nothing below the 370 gram
CTL, Ukai down to 405g only, model #20A.
--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

In article <[email hidden]>,

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

First, the question wasn't Mavic vs DT. Second, the DT hasn't been around
long enough to know if it will have issues. Third, rim cracking has, in
fact, been a major, not minor problem, ever since the hard anodizing came
into vogue. Whether there are other factors at play is a legit question,
since the hard anodizing may have come at the same time as subtle changes
in
rim alloys. One thing's certain- back in the day, we'd see many wheels
fail
due to denting. Denting is almost never seen with modern rims, but
cracking
is. I think we've traded one problem for another, and I don't think it's
just anodizing at fault, but it's likely a contributor.

What you think is not backed by evidence.
How about finding some evidence that rim
alloys have changed in such a way as to
promote cracking, then come back with it.
Otherwise you are promoting a brand new
unsubstantiated rumor among all the others
floating around here.

What's not backed up by evidence? I have a shop full of evidence. I have way
too much evidence, in fact!

Or are you talking specifically about the possibility that rim alloys have
changed over the years?

I think so, since I wrote

Quoted message said:

evidence that rim
alloys have changed in such a way as to
promote cracking

You introduced the topic with

Quoted message said:

Whether there are other factors at play is a legit question,
since the hard anodizing may have come at the same time as subtle changes in
rim alloys.

Quoted message said:

That's really the only thing that hasn't come up in
the various discussions here, and I think it needs to be looked into.

Then look into it. Floating an open ended question in rbt
is an invitation for folks to take the answer as they please.
You know it happens.

--
Michael Press

On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 15:43:08 -0500, A Muzi <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

"Tom Ace" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Are the 1980s rims you have in mind clincher or tubular rims?
265g was about the weight of a Fiamme yellow label tubular rim.

Tom Kunich said:

I have a couple of 32 spoke Japanese clincher rims that are 270 grams
and after weighing them they are actually 265. There were Italian
clincher rims that were lighter. For instance - Mavic made a 280 gram
and on a new mold they were considerably lighter.

270g clincher? Which model?
In 700C size, 1980s books show Araya lists nothing below the 370 gram
CTL, Ukai down to 405g only, model #20A.

Dear Andrew,

Heck, I'm having trouble finding 275 gram clinchers from any year on
the Weight Weenies list:

http://weightweenies.starbike.com/listings/components.php?type=rims&sortby=real

The 700c clinchers seem to start around 350 grams.

Maybe the list leaves out a lot of lightweight clincher rims?

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Quoted message said:

On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 15:43:08 -0500, A Muzi <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

"Tom Ace" <[email hidden]> wrote
> Are the 1980s rims you have in mind clincher or tubular rims?
> 265g was about the weight of a Fiamme yellow label tubular rim.

Tom Kunich said:

I have a couple of 32 spoke Japanese clincher rims that are 270 grams
and after weighing them they are actually 265. There were Italian
clincher rims that were lighter. For instance - Mavic made a 280 gram
and on a new mold they were considerably lighter.

270g clincher? Which model?
In 700C size, 1980s books show Araya lists nothing below the 370 gram
CTL, Ukai down to 405g only, model #20A.

Dear Andrew,

Heck, I'm having trouble finding 275 gram clinchers from any year on
the Weight Weenies list:

http://weightweenies.starbike.com/listings/components.php?type=rims&sortby=real

The 700c clinchers seem to start around 350 grams.

Maybe the list leaves out a lot of lightweight clincher rims?

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

275 grams and they were rideable? Hard to believe.

Lou

A Muzi said:

Tom Ace said:

Are the 1980s rims you have in mind clincher or tubular rims?
265g was about the weight of a Fiamme yellow label tubular rim.

Quoted message said:

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought many
tubular rims of that era were not extruded but rather formed
from sheet. I have noticed a seam running all the way around
the rim (in the middle of the surface the tire glues to) on
Mavic tubular rims from the 70s and 80s.

AFAIK Mavic, Fiamme, SuperChamp Weinmann etc were all extruded and
pinned at the seam opposite the valve with a shaped insert inside.

I put a pic of a mid-1980s Mavic GP4 tubular rim on the web at
http://minortriad.com/gp4.jpg

The seam I'm referring to is a small ridge on the top surface,
and there's a more pronounced blob on the underside of the
same section (visible through the valve hole).

If it's not a seam, what is it? I haven't seen anything like
it on the (extruded) clincher rims I've had.

Tom Ace

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

Quoted message said:

275 grams and they were rideable? Hard to believe.

My mistake - the Araya's were 370 grams but the one's I had were weighed
lighter than that though not much.

But Mavic had some 280 gram clinchers because I bought a set from a friend
and although he claimed that you couldn't ride them if you weighed over 150
lbs I rode them all the time at 200 lbs. The wheels were 32 spoke and didn't
flex noticeably.

Tom Ace said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Are the 1980s rims you have in mind clincher or tubular rims?
265g was about the weight of a Fiamme yellow label tubular rim.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought many tubular
rims of that era were not extruded but rather formed from sheet.
I have noticed a seam running all the way around the rim (in the
middle of the surface the tire glues to) on Mavic tubular rims
from the 70s and 80s.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

AFAIK Mavic, Fiamme, Super Champ, Weinmann, etc were all extruded
and pinned at the seam opposite the valve with a shaped insert.

Quoted message said:

I put a pic of a mid-1980s Mavic GP4 tubular rim on the web at:

http://minortriad.com/gp4.jpg

Quoted message said:

The seam I'm referring to is a small ridge on the top surface, and
there's a more pronounced blob on the underside of the same section
(visible through the valve hole).

Quoted message said:

If it's not a seam, what is it? I haven't seen anything like it on
the (extruded) clincher rims I've had.

From what I have seen, those are artifacts produced by a floating core
extrusion die and constitute a full depth weld in a neutral plane.

Jobst Brandt

Quoted message said:

You introduced the topic with

Quoted message said:

Whether there are other factors at play is a legit question,
since the hard anodizing may have come at the same time as subtle changes
in
rim alloys.

Quoted message said:

That's really the only thing that hasn't come up in
the various discussions here, and I think it needs to be looked into.

Then look into it. Floating an open ended question in rbt
is an invitation for folks to take the answer as they please.
You know it happens.

I'm not just floating an open-ended question for fun. I'm fielding it in the
hope that someone might *know* if that's the case (that alloys have changed
over the years). I know that at least one manufacturer has used various
different alloys of 6000-series aluminum, but that was quite some time ago,
and I'm not privvy to any testing data that may have been done at the time.

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

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

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

Quoted message said:

> First, the question wasn't Mavic vs DT. Second, the DT hasn't been
> around
> long enough to know if it will have issues. Third, rim cracking has,
> in
> fact, been a major, not minor problem, ever since the hard anodizing
> came
> into vogue. Whether there are other factors at play is a legit
> question,
> since the hard anodizing may have come at the same time as subtle
> changes
> in
> rim alloys. One thing's certain- back in the day, we'd see many wheels
> fail
> due to denting. Denting is almost never seen with modern rims, but
> cracking
> is. I think we've traded one problem for another, and I don't think
> it's
> just anodizing at fault, but it's likely a contributor.

What you think is not backed by evidence.
How about finding some evidence that rim
alloys have changed in such a way as to
promote cracking, then come back with it.
Otherwise you are promoting a brand new
unsubstantiated rumor among all the others
floating around here.

What's not backed up by evidence? I have a shop full of evidence. I have
way
too much evidence, in fact!

Or are you talking specifically about the possibility that rim alloys
have
changed over the years?

I think so, since I wrote

Quoted message said:

evidence that rim
alloys have changed in such a way as to
promote cracking

You introduced the topic with

Quoted message said:

Whether there are other factors at play is a legit question,
since the hard anodizing may have come at the same time as subtle changes
in
rim alloys.

Quoted message said:

That's really the only thing that hasn't come up in
the various discussions here, and I think it needs to be looked into.

Then look into it. Floating an open ended question in rbt
is an invitation for folks to take the answer as they please.
You know it happens.

--
Michael Press

"Qui si parla Campagnolo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

"jim beam" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]...
| Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
| > On Jun 17, 11:23?pm, RS <[email hidden]> wrote:
| >> From practical experience any advantage or disadvantages to the
slightly
| >> more expensive Open Pro CD rim vs. the standard Open Pro rim? ?One
| >> LBS suggested the CD version didn't brake as well, other than that I
can't
| >> imagine a problem with the CD version?
| >
| > CD, meaning hard anodizing, can be prone to cracks around the eyelets
| > due to that hard anodizing.
|
| yeah, people post pics of their cracked cd rims here all the time. not.
|
| this is underinformed presumptive jobstian [censored]. peter, you should
| know better by now. rim cracking is due to excess spoke tension and the
| fundamental problem of using extrusions to make the rim hoop -
| [anisotropy]. observe manufacturer spec on spoke tension and you'll
| have no more problem that you would with any other open pro rim.
|
|
| > Treated and then the eyelets are
| > installed, which causes micro cracks, which 'can' lead to p[remature
| > cracking. BUT look at DT, MUCH better rim, the 1.1, double eyelet.
| >
| > Braking, with machined sidewalls on both, is a non issue.

First, the question wasn't Mavic vs DT. Second, the DT hasn't been around
long enough to know if it will have issues. Third, rim cracking has, in
fact, been a major, not minor problem, ever since the hard anodizing came
into vogue. Whether there are other factors at play is a legit question,
since the hard anodizing may have come at the same time as subtle changes
in
rim alloys. One thing's certain- back in the day, we'd see many wheels
fail
due to denting. Denting is almost never seen with modern rims, but
cracking
is. I think we've traded one problem for another, and I don't think it's
just anodizing at fault, but it's likely a contributor.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycleswww.ChainReactionBicycles.com

We have been building with DT for almost a year, probably in excess of
200 rims, w/o any problem whatsoever. Small sample to be sure but.....

As for the OP and if some have an issue with Jobst, they should say
so..I guess he did. He has more problem with Jobst that I have with
shimano and sram.

Joe Young http://www.youngwheels.com/ is also a big fan of DT RR1.1 rims
and he seems to know a thing or two about wheelbuilding.

Tim McTeague