The page I forgot

Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com said:

http://www.biketechreview.com/archive/wheel_review.htm

1. you're trolling. must be a slow day.
2. this guy is bullshitting.

he says:
"Both the Dura-Ace and Ksyrium rear wheels went significantly out of
true during my brief period with them. This is indicative of a poor
wheel building process and in the case of the Ksyrium, there is simply
not enough spoke tension to support my hefty 165 pound butt. The
Dura-Ace wheels exhibited significant rim deformation where the spokes
enter the rim. The large spoke bending moment here will eventually
cause a crack to form at this location. Rims should not deform like
this during the wheel building process."

as the owner [and long term rider] of pre-built mavic and shimano
wheels, and as someone that weighs considerably more than his measly
little "165 pound butt", and as someone that's apparently strong enough
to strip the thread off a fixie hub [🙁], i've never experienced these
alleged problems. my shimano and mavic wheels are stock, straight out
of the box, and have not been "helped" by spoke tension adjustments. if
i can't damage my wheels just by riding them, he can't either.

bottom line, he sets out to denigrate pre-builts, and having failed to
do so on technical grounds, resorts to sabotage. and as if this weren't
enough, he falls back on price as if it's a technical criteria because
that's the only genuine argument he has.

anyone that wants to roll their own is free to do so. and anyone lucky
enough to know a builder that can do a decent job is welcome to use
them. but competent builders are few and far between. to other riders,
pre-builts are the way to go.

this constant bleating about pre-builts clearly means there must be a
real threat of success. after all, if pre-built's weren't successful,
why bother standing in line to complain?

jim beam said:

Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com said:

http://www.biketechreview.com/archive/wheel_review.htm

1. you're trolling. must be a slow day.
2. this guy is bullshitting.

he says:
"Both the Dura-Ace and Ksyrium rear wheels went significantly out of
true during my brief period with them. This is indicative of a poor
wheel building process and in the case of the Ksyrium, there is simply
not enough spoke tension to support my hefty 165 pound butt. The
Dura-Ace wheels exhibited significant rim deformation where the spokes
enter the rim. The large spoke bending moment here will eventually
cause a crack to form at this location. Rims should not deform like
this during the wheel building process."

as the owner [and long term rider] of pre-built mavic and shimano
wheels, and as someone that weighs considerably more than his measly
little "165 pound butt", and as someone that's apparently strong enough
to strip the thread off a fixie hub [🙁], i've never experienced these
alleged problems. my shimano and mavic wheels are stock, straight out
of the box, and have not been "helped" by spoke tension adjustments. if
i can't damage my wheels just by riding them, he can't either.

Says the anonymous poster.

Quoted message said:

bottom line, he sets out to denigrate pre-builts, and having failed to
do so on technical grounds, resorts to sabotage. and as if this weren't
enough, he falls back on price as if it's a technical criteria because
that's the only genuine argument he has.

anyone that wants to roll their own is free to do so. and anyone lucky
enough to know a builder that can do a decent job is welcome to use
them. but competent builders are few and far between. to other riders,
pre-builts are the way to go.

Hey "jim", ever hear of FedEx, UPS, etc.? They will ship wheels from the
builder's shop right to the customer's door.

Quoted message said:

this constant bleating about pre-builts clearly means there must be a
real threat of success. after all, if pre-built's weren't successful,
why bother standing in line to complain?

While the original poster does have a financial interest in selling
shop-built wheels, many of us who criticize "boutique" wheels have no
financial interest either way.

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

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

jim beam said:

Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.comwrote:

Quoted message said:

http://www.biketechreview.com/archive/wheel_review.htm

1. you're trolling. must be a slow day.
2. this guy is bullshitting.

he says:
"Both the Dura-Ace and Ksyrium rear wheels went significantly out of
true during my brief period with them. This is indicative of a poor
wheel building process and in the case of the Ksyrium, there is simply
not enough spoke tension to support my hefty 165 pound butt. The
Dura-Ace wheels exhibited significant rim deformation where the spokes
enter the rim. The large spoke bending moment here will eventually
cause a crack to form at this location. Rims should not deform like
this during the wheel building process."

as the owner [and long term rider] of pre-built mavic and shimano
wheels, and as someone that weighs considerably more than his measly
little "165 pound butt", and as someone that's apparently strong enough
to strip the thread off a fixie hub [🙁], i've never experienced these
alleged problems. my shimano and mavic wheels are stock, straight out
of the box, and have not been "helped" by spoke tension adjustments. if
i can't damage my wheels just by riding them, he can't either.

bottom line, he sets out to denigrate pre-builts, and having failed to
do so on technical grounds, resorts to sabotage. and as if this weren't
enough, he falls back on price as if it's a technical criteria because
that's the only genuine argument he has.

anyone that wants to roll their own is free to do so. and anyone lucky
enough to know a builder that can do a decent job is welcome to use
them. but competent builders are few and far between. to other riders,
pre-builts are the way to go.

this constant bleating about pre-builts clearly means there must be a
real threat of success. after all, if pre-built's weren't successful,
why bother standing in line to complain?

And all those poor sods stranded by the roadside with a failed
Ksyrium? They shouldn't complain?

Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
<snip for clarity>

Quoted message said:

While the original poster does have a financial interest in selling
shop-built wheels, many of us who criticize "boutique" wheels have no
financial interest either way.

as a bent rider, i don't see how you could possibly have an opinion
based on experience.

Ozark Bicycle said:

jim beam said:

Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.comwrote:

Quoted message said:

http://www.biketechreview.com/archive/wheel_review.htm

1. you're trolling. must be a slow day.
2. this guy is bullshitting.

he says:
"Both the Dura-Ace and Ksyrium rear wheels went significantly out of
true during my brief period with them. This is indicative of a poor
wheel building process and in the case of the Ksyrium, there is simply
not enough spoke tension to support my hefty 165 pound butt. The
Dura-Ace wheels exhibited significant rim deformation where the spokes
enter the rim. The large spoke bending moment here will eventually
cause a crack to form at this location. Rims should not deform like
this during the wheel building process."

as the owner [and long term rider] of pre-built mavic and shimano
wheels, and as someone that weighs considerably more than his measly
little "165 pound butt", and as someone that's apparently strong enough
to strip the thread off a fixie hub [🙁], i've never experienced these
alleged problems. my shimano and mavic wheels are stock, straight out
of the box, and have not been "helped" by spoke tension adjustments. if
i can't damage my wheels just by riding them, he can't either.

bottom line, he sets out to denigrate pre-builts, and having failed to
do so on technical grounds, resorts to sabotage. and as if this weren't
enough, he falls back on price as if it's a technical criteria because
that's the only genuine argument he has.

anyone that wants to roll their own is free to do so. and anyone lucky
enough to know a builder that can do a decent job is welcome to use
them. but competent builders are few and far between. to other riders,
pre-builts are the way to go.

this constant bleating about pre-builts clearly means there must be a
real threat of success. after all, if pre-built's weren't successful,
why bother standing in line to complain?

And all those poor sods stranded by the roadside with a failed
Ksyrium? They shouldn't complain?

don't use the ones with alloy spokes! i don't.

jim beam said:

Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
<snip for clarity>

Quoted message said:

While the original poster does have a financial interest in selling
shop-built wheels, many of us who criticize "boutique" wheels have no
financial interest either way.

as a bent rider, i don't see how you could possibly have an opinion
based on experience.

Er "jim", there are some recumbents that use ISO 622-mm and ISO 571-mm
wheels. There are also some pre-built wheels in ISO 406-mm and ISO
451-mm sizes (Aerospoke comes to mind) but these are quite rare.

Being a recumbent rider does not preclude observing upright cyclists
with failed "boutique" wheels.

Since the performance advantages of most of these "boutique" wheels are
so small as to be of no importance to non-racers, spending the extra
money serves no purpose other than to impress at the coffee shop.

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

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Dans le message de news:[email hidden],
Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman <[email hidden]> a réfléchi, et puis
a déclaré :

Quoted message said:

jim beam said:

Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
<snip for clarity>

Quoted message said:

While the original poster does have a financial interest in selling
shop-built wheels, many of us who criticize "boutique" wheels have
no financial interest either way.

as a bent rider, i don't see how you could possibly have an opinion
based on experience.

Er "jim", there are some recumbents that use ISO 622-mm and ISO 571-mm
wheels. There are also some pre-built wheels in ISO 406-mm and ISO
451-mm sizes (Aerospoke comes to mind) but these are quite rare.

Being a recumbent rider does not preclude observing upright cyclists
with failed "boutique" wheels.

Since the performance advantages of most of these "boutique" wheels
are so small as to be of no importance to non-racers, spending the
extra money serves no purpose other than to impress at the coffee
shop.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

1 - learn whata a "boutique" means - Mr Chisholm operates a boutique. The
wheels you seem to want to [censored] about are factory products.

2 - There are a lot of racers. They may just stop in this forum to read.

3 - You seem to suggest you can tell about lateral flex while en danseuese
from a recumbent? Gotta see that.
--
Les faits relatés ici ne sont que pure fiction, et ne sauraient être
utilisés ou rapprochés d'une situation réelle existant ou ayant
existée

Tom 'Johnny Sunset' Sherman said:

jim beam said:

Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
<snip for clarity>

Quoted message said:

While the original poster does have a financial interest in selling
shop-built wheels, many of us who criticize "boutique" wheels have no
financial interest either way.

as a bent rider, i don't see how you could possibly have an opinion
based on experience.

Er "jim", there are some recumbents that use ISO 622-mm and ISO 571-mm
wheels. There are also some pre-built wheels in ISO 406-mm and ISO
451-mm sizes (Aerospoke comes to mind) but these are quite rare.

Being a recumbent rider does not preclude observing upright cyclists
with failed "boutique" wheels.

Since the performance advantages of most of these "boutique" wheels are
so small as to be of no importance to non-racers, spending the extra
money serves no purpose other than to impress at the coffee shop.

er, "tom", let's get back to the point - what personal experience do
/you/ have that qualifies you to have an opinion?

jim beam said:

Tom 'Johnny Sunset' Sherman said:

jim beam said:

Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
<snip for clarity>
> While the original poster does have a financial interest in selling
> shop-built wheels, many of us who criticize "boutique" wheels have
> no financial interest either way.
>

as a bent rider, i don't see how you could possibly have an opinion
based on experience.

Er "jim", there are some recumbents that use ISO 622-mm and ISO 571-mm
wheels. There are also some pre-built wheels in ISO 406-mm and ISO
451-mm sizes (Aerospoke comes to mind) but these are quite rare.

Being a recumbent rider does not preclude observing upright cyclists
with failed "boutique" wheels.

Since the performance advantages of most of these "boutique" wheels
are so small as to be of no importance to non-racers, spending the
extra money serves no purpose other than to impress at the coffee shop.

er, "tom", let's get back to the point - what personal experience do
/you/ have that qualifies you to have an opinion?

My personal experience is that I saved a lot of money getting my (so far
durable) wheels built at a bike shop compared to the price of "boutique"
wheels that would offer no significant advantage.

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

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.com said:

http://www.biketechreview.com/archive/wheel_review.htm

My favorite wheel inertia page:

http://www.charles.whitaker.name/wheels.html

While I agree the inertia effects are small, and only applicable at
times of acceleration, I think often people underestimate how
important even 1% changes can be.

I keep getting dropped on hills, but if I could increase my power by
only 1% it would mean I could get up a 1km long 5% grade about 4
seconds faster. That could make all the difference, so reducing the
amount of energy wasted spinning up wheels might help.

That said, I don't think boutique wheels is the answer. The only thing
that have going for (some of) them is they look cool. Most of them are
not very aero, most are not very stiff, most are more problematic to
fix when damaged, and most are pretty expensive for what you get in
terms of performance and reliability/strength. But that is no reason
for someone not to get some if they want some!

But back to inertia: with my lightweight wheels which are 1100g
lighter than my regular wheels I notice a very significant difference
in low speed acceleration (which is when it is most noticable so
that's not that strange), but this comes at the expense of a
squirrelly feel. Sometimes rotational inertia is a nice thing to have!
It definitely makes for a more stable ride.

Joseph

Sandy Leurre said:

Dans le message de news:[email hidden],
Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman <[email hidden]> a réfléchi, et puis
a déclaré :

Quoted message said:

jim beam said:

Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
<snip for clarity>
> While the original poster does have a financial interest in selling
> shop-built wheels, many of us who criticize "boutique" wheels have
> no financial interest either way.
>
as a bent rider, i don't see how you could possibly have an opinion
based on experience.

Er "jim", there are some recumbents that use ISO 622-mm and ISO 571-mm
wheels. There are also some pre-built wheels in ISO 406-mm and ISO
451-mm sizes (Aerospoke comes to mind) but these are quite rare.

Being a recumbent rider does not preclude observing upright cyclists
with failed "boutique" wheels.

Since the performance advantages of most of these "boutique" wheels
are so small as to be of no importance to non-racers, spending the
extra money serves no purpose other than to impress at the coffee
shop.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

Doesn't micro$oft outlook express 6.00 know what the signature separator is?

Quoted message said:

1 - learn whata a "boutique" means - Mr Chisholm operates a boutique. The
wheels you seem to want to [censored] about are factory products.

I was using it in the common Usenet cycling usage, and further more I
put "boutique" in quotes for just that reason. Please try to keep up.

Quoted message said:

2 - There are a lot of racers. They may just stop in this forum to read.

Racing has always involved greater cost and lower durability for
marginal performance increases. That is why I specifically EXCLUDED
racers from the group who would not see any real benefit from minor
weight and aerodynamic advantages.

Quoted message said:

3 - You seem to suggest you can tell about lateral flex while en danseuese
from a recumbent? Gotta see that.

When did I say anything about lateral flex?

By the way, my recumbent trike certainly puts considerable lateral loads
on the wheels when cornering, and there is no way in hell that I would
consider using low spoke count "boutique" [1] wheels on it.

[1] Usenet cycling group definition of "boutique".

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

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Tom 'Johnny Sunset' Sherman said:

jim beam said:

Tom 'Johnny Sunset' Sherman said:

"jim beam" wrote:
> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> <snip for clarity>
>> While the original poster does have a financial interest in selling
>> shop-built wheels, many of us who criticize "boutique" wheels have
>> no financial interest either way.
>>
>
> as a bent rider, i don't see how you could possibly have an opinion
> based on experience.

Er "jim", there are some recumbents that use ISO 622-mm and ISO
571-mm wheels. There are also some pre-built wheels in ISO 406-mm and
ISO 451-mm sizes (Aerospoke comes to mind) but these are quite rare.

Being a recumbent rider does not preclude observing upright cyclists
with failed "boutique" wheels.

Since the performance advantages of most of these "boutique" wheels
are so small as to be of no importance to non-racers, spending the
extra money serves no purpose other than to impress at the coffee shop.

er, "tom", let's get back to the point - what personal experience do
/you/ have that qualifies you to have an opinion?

My personal experience is that I saved a lot of money getting my (so far
durable) wheels built at a bike shop compared to the price of "boutique"
wheels that would offer no significant advantage.

that's conjecture, not experience.

jim beam said:

Tom 'Johnny Sunset' Sherman said:

jim beam said:

Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> "jim beam" wrote:
>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>> <snip for clarity>
>>> While the original poster does have a financial interest in
>>> selling shop-built wheels, many of us who criticize "boutique"
>>> wheels have no financial interest either way.
>>>
>>
>> as a bent rider, i don't see how you could possibly have an opinion
>> based on experience.
>
> Er "jim", there are some recumbents that use ISO 622-mm and ISO
> 571-mm wheels. There are also some pre-built wheels in ISO 406-mm
> and ISO 451-mm sizes (Aerospoke comes to mind) but these are quite
> rare.
>
> Being a recumbent rider does not preclude observing upright cyclists
> with failed "boutique" wheels.
>
> Since the performance advantages of most of these "boutique" wheels
> are so small as to be of no importance to non-racers, spending the
> extra money serves no purpose other than to impress at the coffee shop.
>

er, "tom", let's get back to the point - what personal experience do
/you/ have that qualifies you to have an opinion?

My personal experience is that I saved a lot of money getting my (so
far durable) wheels built at a bike shop compared to the price of
"boutique" wheels that would offer no significant advantage.

that's conjecture, not experience.

With lightweight wheel covers [1] I can have wheels that are more
aerodynamic than any "boutique" wheels short of something like a Renn
disc. The potential weight savings from "boutique" wheels are also so
small to be neglible. My conventional spoked wheels do not require any
maintenance (regarding the spokes).

What benefits would I derive?

[1] Not nearly the crosswind problem for ISO 305 to 451-mm wheels as it
is for ISO 559 to 622-mm wheels.

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

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Dans le message de news:[email hidden],
Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman <[email hidden]> a réfléchi, et puis
a déclaré :

Quoted message said:

Sandy Leurre said:

Dans le message de news:[email hidden],
Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman <[email hidden]> a réfléchi,
et puis a déclaré :

Quoted message said:

"jim beam" wrote:
> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> <snip for clarity>
>> While the original poster does have a financial interest in
>> selling shop-built wheels, many of us who criticize "boutique"
>> wheels have no financial interest either way.
>>
> as a bent rider, i don't see how you could possibly have an opinion
> based on experience.
Er "jim", there are some recumbents that use ISO 622-mm and ISO
571-mm wheels. There are also some pre-built wheels in ISO 406-mm
and ISO 451-mm sizes (Aerospoke comes to mind) but these are quite
rare. Being a recumbent rider does not preclude observing upright
cyclists
with failed "boutique" wheels.

Since the performance advantages of most of these "boutique" wheels
are so small as to be of no importance to non-racers, spending the
extra money serves no purpose other than to impress at the coffee
shop.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

Doesn't micro$oft outlook express 6.00 know what the signature
separator is?

Quoted message said:

1 - learn whata a "boutique" means - Mr Chisholm operates a
boutique. The wheels you seem to want to [censored] about are factory
products.

I was using it in the common Usenet cycling usage, and further more I
put "boutique" in quotes for just that reason. Please try to keep up.

Quoted message said:

2 - There are a lot of racers. They may just stop in this forum to
read.

Racing has always involved greater cost and lower durability for
marginal performance increases. That is why I specifically EXCLUDED
racers from the group who would not see any real benefit from minor
weight and aerodynamic advantages.

Quoted message said:

3 - You seem to suggest you can tell about lateral flex while en
danseuese from a recumbent? Gotta see that.

When did I say anything about lateral flex?

By the way, my recumbent trike certainly puts considerable lateral
loads on the wheels when cornering, and there is no way in hell that I
would
consider using low spoke count "boutique" [1] wheels on it.

[1] Usenet cycling group definition of "boutique".

So, I am guessing it's your illiteracy that you would use as a defense. Got
it.
You also did not exclude racers. Rather, you wrote of racing wheels in an
inappropriate application. But you did it lying down. OK, got that too.

Tom 'Johnny Sunset' Sherman said:

jim beam said:

Tom 'Johnny Sunset' Sherman said:

"jim beam" wrote:
> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>> <snip for clarity>
>>>> While the original poster does have a financial interest in
>>>> selling shop-built wheels, many of us who criticize "boutique"
>>>> wheels have no financial interest either way.
>>>>
>>>
>>> as a bent rider, i don't see how you could possibly have an
>>> opinion based on experience.
>>
>> Er "jim", there are some recumbents that use ISO 622-mm and ISO
>> 571-mm wheels. There are also some pre-built wheels in ISO 406-mm
>> and ISO 451-mm sizes (Aerospoke comes to mind) but these are quite
>> rare.
>>
>> Being a recumbent rider does not preclude observing upright
>> cyclists with failed "boutique" wheels.
>>
>> Since the performance advantages of most of these "boutique" wheels
>> are so small as to be of no importance to non-racers, spending the
>> extra money serves no purpose other than to impress at the coffee
>> shop.
>>
>
> er, "tom", let's get back to the point - what personal experience do
> /you/ have that qualifies you to have an opinion?

My personal experience is that I saved a lot of money getting my (so
far durable) wheels built at a bike shop compared to the price of
"boutique" wheels that would offer no significant advantage.

that's conjecture, not experience.

With lightweight wheel covers [1] I can have wheels that are more
aerodynamic than any "boutique" wheels short of something like a Renn
disc. The potential weight savings from "boutique" wheels are also so
small to be neglible. My conventional spoked wheels do not require any
maintenance (regarding the spokes).

What benefits would I derive?

[1] Not nearly the crosswind problem for ISO 305 to 451-mm wheels as it
is for ISO 559 to 622-mm wheels.

what part of "that's conjecture, not experience" do you not understand?
repeating conjecture still doesn't compensate for your deficiency.

jim beam said:

Qui si parla Campagnolo-www.vecchios.comwrote:

Quoted message said:

http://www.biketechreview.com/archive/wheel_review.htm

1. you're trolling. must be a slow day.
2. this guy is bullshitting.

Snip

Quoted message said:

bottom line, he sets out to denigrate pre-builts, and having failed to
do so on technical grounds, resorts to sabotage. and as if this weren't
enough, he falls back on price as if it's a technical criteria because
that's the only genuine argument he has.

Snip

Quoted message said:

this constant bleating about pre-builts clearly means there must be a
real threat of success. after all, if pre-built's weren't successful,
why bother standing in line to complain?

Greetings, Jim. I have nothing to add to the arguments that has not
already been said many many many times on this forum and elsewhere.
(By the way, how do you find enough time to ride your hobby horse and
your bicycle? Perhaps you are a sponsored racer or a man of
independent means? That would explain your use of disposable
wheels.)

A few things in your posting did get my attention, however:

"he sets out to denigrate pre-builts, and having failed to do so on
technical grounds, resorts to sabotage"

Sabotage???????

and......

"if this weren't enough, he falls back on price as if it's a technical
criteria because that's the only genuine argument he has"

I thought the article was an attempt to evaluate wheels from all
aspects, not merely technical ones. For most mortals, price is a
significant consideration, and relating price to performance is the
way rational buying decisions are made. Of course, for the sponsored
racer or man of independent means....... (By the way, the singular
form of criteria is criterion.)

and finally....

"this constant bleating about pre-builts clearly means there must be a
real threat of success"

Does anyone seriously doubt the success of pre-built wheels? But what
kind of success? What old sourpusses like me see is an enormous
MARKETING success. If you had been able to ask riders of earlier
generations if they would pay the (inflation/standard-of-living
adjusted) prices of today I'm pretty sure what the answer would have
been.

Best wishes,

Nigel Grinter
Well-Spoken Wheels Inc.

P.S. I see you still have that problem with your shift key. Have you
considered taking your computer to Best Buy for their Geek Squad to
take a look?

[email hidden] wrote:
<snip rehashed drivel>

great contribution nigel - i'm sure i speak for thousands when i say how
much i appreciate the extensive experience, enlightenment and
information you've so thoughtfully provided.

and marketing is a total red herring. oval chainwheels, offset axle
pedals and pneumatic shifting enjoyed the benefits of shimano's
heavyweight marketing machine, only to die helpless, twitching and alone
at the side of the road. a bit like artisan wheelbuilders that don't
recognize what consumers want.

Sandy Leurre said:

Dans le message de news:[email hidden],
Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman <[email hidden]> a réfléchi, et puis
a déclaré :

Quoted message said:

Sandy Leurre said:

Dans le message de news:[email hidden],
Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman <[email hidden]> a réfléchi,
et puis a déclaré :
> "jim beam" wrote:
>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>> <snip for clarity>
>>> While the original poster does have a financial interest in
>>> selling shop-built wheels, many of us who criticize "boutique"
>>> wheels have no financial interest either way.
>>>
>> as a bent rider, i don't see how you could possibly have an opinion
>> based on experience.
> Er "jim", there are some recumbents that use ISO 622-mm and ISO
> 571-mm wheels. There are also some pre-built wheels in ISO 406-mm
> and ISO 451-mm sizes (Aerospoke comes to mind) but these are quite
> rare. Being a recumbent rider does not preclude observing upright
> cyclists
> with failed "boutique" wheels.
>
> Since the performance advantages of most of these "boutique" wheels
> are so small as to be of no importance to non-racers, spending the
> extra money serves no purpose other than to impress at the coffee
> shop.
> --
> Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
> The weather is here, wish you were beautiful

Doesn't micro$oft outlook express 6.00 know what the signature
separator is?

Quoted message said:

1 - learn whata a "boutique" means - Mr Chisholm operates a
boutique. The wheels you seem to want to [censored] about are factory
products.

I was using it in the common Usenet cycling usage, and further more I
put "boutique" in quotes for just that reason. Please try to keep up.

Quoted message said:

2 - There are a lot of racers. They may just stop in this forum to
read.

Racing has always involved greater cost and lower durability for
marginal performance increases. That is why I specifically EXCLUDED
racers from the group who would not see any real benefit from minor
weight and aerodynamic advantages.

Quoted message said:

3 - You seem to suggest you can tell about lateral flex while en
danseuese from a recumbent? Gotta see that.

When did I say anything about lateral flex?

By the way, my recumbent trike certainly puts considerable lateral
loads on the wheels when cornering, and there is no way in hell that I
would
consider using low spoke count "boutique" [1] wheels on it.

[1] Usenet cycling group definition of "boutique".

So, I am guessing it's your illiteracy that you would use as a defense. Got
it.

My use of the word "boutique" was the standard use for this context
(rec.bicycles.tech). Is that too hard for a French lawyer to understand?

Quoted message said:

You also did not exclude racers.

Try reading what I actually wrote, not what you want it to say.

Quoted message said:

Rather, you wrote of racing wheels in an
inappropriate application. But you did it lying down. OK, got that too.

Being upright takes oxygen away from the brain. 😉

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

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

jim beam said:

Tom 'Johnny Sunset' Sherman said:

jim beam said:

Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
> "jim beam" wrote:
>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>> "jim beam" wrote:
>>>> Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman wrote:
>>>> <snip for clarity>
>>>>> While the original poster does have a financial interest in
>>>>> selling shop-built wheels, many of us who criticize "boutique"
>>>>> wheels have no financial interest either way.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> as a bent rider, i don't see how you could possibly have an
>>>> opinion based on experience.
>>>
>>> Er "jim", there are some recumbents that use ISO 622-mm and ISO
>>> 571-mm wheels. There are also some pre-built wheels in ISO 406-mm
>>> and ISO 451-mm sizes (Aerospoke comes to mind) but these are quite
>>> rare.
>>>
>>> Being a recumbent rider does not preclude observing upright
>>> cyclists with failed "boutique" wheels.
>>>
>>> Since the performance advantages of most of these "boutique"
>>> wheels are so small as to be of no importance to non-racers,
>>> spending the extra money serves no purpose other than to impress
>>> at the coffee shop.
>>>
>>
>> er, "tom", let's get back to the point - what personal experience
>> do /you/ have that qualifies you to have an opinion?
>
> My personal experience is that I saved a lot of money getting my (so
> far durable) wheels built at a bike shop compared to the price of
> "boutique" wheels that would offer no significant advantage.
>

that's conjecture, not experience.

With lightweight wheel covers [1] I can have wheels that are more
aerodynamic than any "boutique" wheels short of something like a Renn
disc. The potential weight savings from "boutique" wheels are also so
small to be neglible. My conventional spoked wheels do not require any
maintenance (regarding the spokes).

What benefits would I derive?

[1] Not nearly the crosswind problem for ISO 305 to 451-mm wheels as
it is for ISO 559 to 622-mm wheels.

what part of "that's conjecture, not experience" do you not understand?
repeating conjecture still doesn't compensate for your deficiency.

By "jim beam's" standard, an engineer should go out and verify basic
material properties before using them in a design, despite there being
well established values for these properties. Do we really need to
personally verify the elastic modulus of steel before designing a steel
structure?

It is pure conjecture on "jim beam's" part that I would benefit by
buying expensive factory built wheels using expensive proprietary parts.

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

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com