Alchemy’s ORC-UL Campagnolo Freehub Body

Alchemy has postponed the release of the Campagnolo 11 speed ORC-UL hub.  At the very earliest the new release date is December 2013.  According to Alchemy this is due to a couple of new developments.  For one thing, the intense demand for this Shimano 10/11sp version of the ORC-UL has demanded significantly more time than expected. Also Alchemy has found a solution for Campagnolo drive trains that they say works perfectly.

Here’s the email we received from Alchemy on the matter.

We have decided to delay the release of a Campy specific hub. However, there is a viable option. I recently tested the use of a Shimano 11sp cassette with a Campy drive train and I discovered that, by using three micro shims placed roughly equally throughout the stack, a Shimano 11sp stack will shift perfectly with a Campy drive train.

Currently, the ORC-UL is available in S10 and S11 versions.  To address the needs of Campy users, I am now offering a modified version of the S11 that will include spacers for Campy 11. The modified S11 hub (O-UL-SC-11) will include the spacers and instructions on where to place them in the Shimano 11sp stack to achieve perfect shifting with a C11 drive train. I have tested this and the shifting is excellent.

At this time, we do not have a target release date for a Campy specific hub.

~ Alchemy Bicycle Works

Image Gallery: Assembling Alchemy’s ORC-UL

Completely disassembled save the final bearing in the freehub body.

The freehub body slides onto / into the hub shell.

Once the freehub fixing bolt is installed, all that’s left is the bearings and axle.

Once the bearings are installed the second set of seals will be placed.

The last step is installing the axle which threads on the drive side.

The final weight was slightly under Alchemy’s claimed weight.

The post Alchemy ORC-UL appeared first on Fair Wheel Bikes.

First off we have some rims that Velocity made for us using their A23 extrusion.  Not terribly expensive at around $90 per rim, which is really quite affordable for a one off.  This set came in at a very consistent 282 grams each for a 32 hole version.

Mated to that will be some Tioga Powerband and Powerblock tires.  The front 1.85 came in right at claimed weight but the rear 1.75 was a portly 20 grams over claimed weight.  Still not considered heavy by any means.

Filling the tire will be some special tubes from Switzerland.  Made by Eclipse these are the by far the lightest option for a tube, but at $68 per tube they are actually more expensive than the kevlar based tires that will wrap them.  At 40 grams per tube though, the rotational weight savings is hard to pass up at any cost.

Added to the rear hub we also have the titanium 13t cog from Recon, Kcnc spacer kit, Parts of Passion lockring, and Control Tech titanium bolt on kit.

Coming soon, the custom made spokes and more of the components.  We also begin fabrication of the custom frame in a couple weeks when NAHBS is over.

The post Project BMX Part 2 appeared first on Fair Wheel Bikes.

One thing that made our hub review so successful was the presentation of different viewpoints by having the article be written by more than one person.  We are going to continue on with that theme, this time with wheel builder Eric Gottesman from Ergott wheels.  I consider Eric to be one of the best wheel builders working in the U.S. and am honored to have him writing this article with me.  Eric has been building custom wheels for more than 12 years, giving the two of us a combined experience of more than 30 years.

Unfortunately, due to the staggering number of rim options, we just can’t cover every rim on the market. So we are limiting this review to 15 of the most popular rims, including selections from DT Swiss, H+Son, Hed, Kinlin, Mavic, Pacenti, Velocity, Stans, and Zipp.

Weight:  As measured by us using an averaged weight from multiple rims.

Price:  The given price is suggested U.S. retail

Dimensions: All dimensions are measured by us not using claimed specs by manufacturers.  Depth, width and internal width are all rounded to the nearest 0.5mm

Some notes on tubeless:  On the mtb side of wheels there is UST, a simple tubeless standard that let’s you know what is easily compatible.  Road wheels lack this standard.  There are multiple standards from different companies each with different meanings.  Tubeless, tubeless ready, tubeless friendly and tubeless compatible.  Basically what this means is that any of these rims are designed with tubeless in mind, but they are not claiming any specific compatibility with specific tubeless tires and pressures.  Personally I think that until there is a universal standard any of the tubeless standards can be thought of as being easier to convert from tubed to tubeless but offers no universal guarantees.  They may or may not work with certain tires and at certain pressures.  Typically the main but not only component of a tubeless system will be a raised bead lock where the tire snaps into place when at pressure.  This should allow the tire to remain in place even if pressure is let out.

Aluminum alloy vs Carbon:  It’s important to note that when we discuss carbon rims, we refer to high quality rims such as Enve or Zipp.  We are specifically not talking about unbranded wheels sold online under different names, as those are all over the spectrum from some quite nice ones to some which I’d consider dangerous to ride.

When considering a custom wheel build, one of the most critical decisions is the choice of rim material. While the intended application will have a large impact on this decision, there are other equally important considerations.

The intended use of a wheel set may well make the definitive decision on the material of choice. Is the wheel set used for recreational riding, training, racing, or combination of these? For recreationalists, any quality of the wheel set (or any component, for that matter) that improves the riding experience is highly desirable. Generally, you get what you pay for, so budget will largely define the choices for these riders. In the case of cyclists desiring high-mileage training wheels, strength, durability, and affordability are generally the important considerations. Conversely, a low mileage, race-day only wheel set may make some major concessions in durability and/or affordability in order to achieve superior performance. Of course, the type or types of races that a wheel set is intended for will define its specific characteristics. To make some very broad generalizations, aluminum tends to be an excellent choice for inexpensive, heavy-use wheel sets, while carbon rims are more often used in race applications and situations where maximum performance or a superior ride experience is desired.

For all but the most enviable cyclists, budget can be a major roadblock to building that most ideal wheel set. A good quality carbon wheel set will generally rival its aluminum counterparts in performance through increased strength and stiffness, and generally lighter weight,  but with a cost penalty of in the range of $1,000-2,000. For those who can afford the expense of a quality carbon rim set, another important question to ask is “Can you afford to replace them?” A rim is essentially a wearable component. The braking track on a rim has a definite lifespan, largely defined by the conditions in which it is ridden. In dry conditions, rims can last many, many years, even under heavy use. But in wet environments, rims experience increased abrasion with the brake pads and accelerated wear that can put a wheel out of commission in just a few seasons. And there always looms the possibility of impact, whether through crashing or impact with road debris. The cost of a dented aluminum rim pales in comparison to the price tag attached to its quality carbon counterpart, even with some companies’ generous crash replacement programs.

Traditionally alloy rims offered better and more consistent braking response particularly in wet environments.   However recent innovations in carbon rims have done a lot to close this gap so a high quality carbon rim may now offer the same braking performance as a high quality alloy.  It should be noted that this varies greatly, as a poor quality carbon rim can have extremely poor quality brake performance.

Rim width:  A current trend among rim manufacturers is to move the internal and external widths of their rims towards wider dimensions.  A wider rim changes the shape of the tire on the rim and allows for more air volume.  More air volume can, but does not necessarily lead to improved ride quality.  What it does do is allow for running lower pressures with decreased chance of pinch flats.  We typically recommend running 10 psi lower pressure in wider rims with tubes.  Wider rims can also provide a stiffer starting point for a wheel build allowing for use of fewer spokes.  Many will argue that a wider rim also produces a more aero setup.  However we don’t fully agree with this. A wider rim gives the possibility for a more aero and more stable setup with deeper rims, but with shallow 30mm rims we’ve seen no evidence that this is correct.  For example one of the widest rims in the test, the Zipp 101 has been tested by Tour magazine and while it has produced very respectable drag numbers, other rims with lower and narrower profiles have produced even better results.   Like with all things there are tradeoffs and wider rims do have some.  The biggest drawback to wider rims is that they come at a weight penalty over narrower rims.  They may have compatibility issues with some brake setups, and they also tend to be the more expensive option.

Asymmetric rims: While we are not specifically featuring any offset rims in the review, some of them are, or soon will be available with offset.  Offset rims are an attempt to gain back some of the dimensional losses of wider freehub bodies that have been adopted over the years.  Without regard to any of the rims in this review, in the past we’ve found that asymmetric rims have tended to have higher failure rates unless the rim is reinforced and weight added to the extrusion.  Perhaps a better choice to gain back some of the tension ratio is to use a heavier gauge drive side spoke compared to the non drive side.

Now on to the rims:

DT RR415.
Weight: 421 Grams
Price: $85
Depth: 21mm
Width: 19.5mm
Internal Width: 15mm
Drillings: 28, 32
Colors: black, grey.
Thoughts: A fairly traditional boxier section rim that should appeal to those seeking a classic look.  The rim builds nice and even with good quality alloy.  Like with many DT components this one seeks a balance of characteristics rather than trying to excel in any one area.  The rim is light, well made, has good braking performance and a middle of the road priced, but with a decrease in stiffness.  It is limited in drillings to only 28 and 32.

Eric:   What I like about DT more than Kinlin is the alloy is better.  The Kinlin rim is softer and more prone to wear.  DT rims are more round out of the box and build up with more even tension and more true.  Spoke count limits this to a more “classic build”.  Looks great on most bikes, but out of place on a Specialized Venge or Cervelo S5.

———————————————————–

DT RR440
Weight: 453 grams.
Price: $80
Depth: 21mm
Width: 21mm
Internal Width: 16.5mm
Drillings: 20, 24, 28, 32
Colors: Black
Note: Available as an Asymmetric rim.
Thoughts:  A better all around option from DT than the RR415.  It has the same build quality as the 415, but the 440 finds itself being wider both internally and externally.  It’s stiffer which allows it a wider range of uses as well as lower drillings.  Like the 415 it has a nice brake surface and a nice price.

Eric: Nice rim and DT rim quality has always been great.  I typically recommend the XR-270, but know that braking performance of the DT rim is better.

——————————————–

H+Son Archetype:
Weight: 472 grams.
Price: $80-$90 (depending on finish)
Depth: 25mm
Width: 23mm
Internal width: 17mm
Drillings: 20, 24, 28, 32, 36
Colors: Black, Hard Ano, Silver.
Thoughts:  This is one of my favorite rims.  Wide internal and external dimensions with a good 25mm depth, decent weight, decent price and good overall stiffness, make this an ideal everyday, any condition rider.  The overall build and material quality is very high.  Available in plenty of drillings and several finishes.  I don’t like the black version of this rim because it’s anodized brake track does not hold up well to wear and it begins to look poor rather quickly.  However the hard anodized version which is more of a grey finish holds up quite well.  The hard ano also has more of a carbon rim look which may not appeal to everyone, but does appeal to me.

Eric: This rim is on my short list and with better distribution channels will be a good option to have.  The hard anodizing surface is polarizing.  Some people love the look of a well used set of anodized rims, others think it looks bad.  With disc brake bikes becoming more popular for road/cross bikes, this problem is eliminated and the wheels will continue to have black sidewalls for the life of them.

————————————————-

H+Son TB14:
Weight: 505 grams
Price: $80-$90 (depending on finish)
Depth: 14mm
Width: 23mm
Internal width: 17.5mm
Drillings: 28, 32, 36
Colors: Black, hard anodized, silver.
Thoughts: Old school classic look mixed with modern technology.  It features a basic shape that looks like an old school classic, but with wider modern dimensions and quality.  Nice machined brake tracks, welded seam and double eyelets.  It’s one of the heavier rims, but builds a super strong everyday, every terrain wheelset.  A great modern choice for pave.  The valve hole badge is also a nice touch lending to the classic look.

Eric:  The polished finish is great for someone that wants to make a modern, classic.

————————————————

Hed Belgium C2:
Weight: 458 grams.
Price: $130
Depth: 24mm
Width: 23mm
Internal width: 17.5mm
Drillings: 24, 28, 32
Colors: Black
Thoughts: One of the first wide rims on the market, and superb build quality, in the past, gave them a leg up on a lot of others.  However in the last year Hed seems to be discouraging sales of their rims and others have come out with competing rims at equal quality for better prices, which has leveled the field.  The Hed rim has a great all around shape and consistent extrusions lead to more even spoke tension in builds.  It also has a really nice bead blasted finish with reflective logos, but this may not offset the price, drilling and availability issues.

Eric: Similar thoughts.  I loved working with this rim, but Hed has made it all but impossible to deal with.  I’ve had wait times of a week and wait times of several months.  They won’t sell any drilling less than 24 anymore purposefully limiting the choices to make their builds more attractive.  Luckily, the void they left has been filled with choices that I think are as good or even better.

————————————————-

Kinlin XR-19W:
Weight: 396 grams
Price: $45
Depth: 21mm
Width: 19.5mm
Internal width: 15mm
Drillings: 20, 24, 28, 32
Colors: Black, silver.
Thoughts:  One of the lightest and least expensive rims in the review makes this an ideal choice for weight conscious, budget oriented builds.  The XR19W has single eyelets and a classic shape concentrating more on light weight.   We’d typically not recommend a 20/24 version of rim be built for riders over 150 pounds, but at 24/28 we find it works quite well for riders at 180 pounds.  Of all the superlight clinchers this one is often my first choice.

Eric:  I like this rim, but you have to be careful in choosing the right application.  It’s better with a higher spoke count.  Once you up the spoke count, you get closer to the territory of other options.  I usually figure on 4 more spokes per wheel than I would with the wider rims in the 450g range.  The are best suited for wheel projects that are trying to reach a target weight.

————————————————–

Kinlin XR-270:
Weight: 451 grams
Price: $45
Depth: 27mm
Width: 19.5mm
Internal width: 14 mm
Drillings: 18, 20, 24, 28, 32
Colors: Black, blue, gold, green, pink, red, silver, white.
Thoughts: This is probably one of the most popular aftermarket rims in the U.S. and with good reason.  It’s got a decent weight, good price, great stiffness and good longevity.  It’s available in wide range of drillings and a wide range of colors and works well for riders of all sizes.  If it has a weak point it is that the brake track produces less consistent braking than some of the other rims.

Eric: Usually a better option than the XR-300 due to similar dimensions, but more round and even tension when built up.  It’s a great “bang for the buck” rim that does a lot of things well, but nothing spectacular.

———————————————-

Kinlin XC-279:
Weight: 498 grams
Price: $60
Depth: 28mm
Width: 23mm
Internal width: 17mm
Drillings: 20, 24, 28, 32
Colors: Black, silver.
Thoughts: Similar in shape and dimension to the Hed, and at a big price savings, but with a penalty in the weight department.  This rim builds a really nice round wheel with consistently even spoke tension.  Stiffness and strength are both high on this rim which makes it a good choice for everyday riders of all sizes.  This rim seems to exhibit better brake track characteristics than other Kinlin rims.  Available in a wide range of drillings this really doesn’t give up anything on other wide rims.  It is heavier than some other wide rims, but at 28mm it’s also deeper.

Eric:  The smart ride will choose this rim over the rest of the Kinlin line.  It will be more aerodynamic and have the wider rim advantages shared by other 23mm rims.  The weigh allows me more confidence when recommending lower spoke counts to riders with more power/weight.

————————————————————-

Kinlin XR-300:
Weight: 466 grams
Price: $50
Depth: 30mm
Width: 18mm
Internal width: 13.5
Drillings: 16, 18, 20, 24, 28, 32
Colors: Black, blue, gold, green, pink, red, silver, white.
Thoughts: The predecessor to the XR270, this rim is a nice rim but seems to be giving up to it’s competitors particularly the 270.  The 300 has an old school deep v look and at 30mm it’s one of the deepest rims in the review.  Over the last year or two we’ve begun to chose the slightly shallower 270 over the 300 most times due to more balanced characteristics.  The 300 is still a good choice for a rider looking to build a bombproof training wheel.

Eric: I agree.  Unless I’m replacing an older build and I’m matching rims, I recommend the XR-270 every time over this rim.  The 27mm is a little wider which probably makes it more aerodynamic anyway and it’s lighter to boot.

————————————————————

Mavic Open Pro:
Weight: 447 grams
Price: $65-$80 (depending on finish)
Depth: 19mm
Width: 20mm
Internal width: 15mm
Drillings: 32
Colors: Black, hard anodized, silver.
Thoughts:  The old guard. The Open Pro has been around for a long time and seen very few updates during those years.  It’s typically not a rim we choose to build on as we think there are plenty of better options but decided to include it in this review for comparison sake.  The Mavic does have a nice brake surface and a good classic look with eyelets.  However it seems to be a bit more prone to cracking over time than some of the other more modern rims.

Eric: Nice rim when it was more widely used.  The later rims I worked with weren’t as round and consistent.  Lots of complaints about rattling slag by the joint.  People have resorted to inserting foam into a small hole by the joint to stop the rattle since the pieces have no way of being removed.  Eyelets have been known to loosen up and make noise as well.  I’m not really sure why Mavic even makes these rims anymore.  They are clearly interested in selling wheels, not rims.

—————————————————————

Pacenti SL23:
Weight: 449 grams.
Price: $98
Depth: 26mm
Width: 24mm
Internal width: 18mm
Drillings: 20, 24, 28, 32
Colors: Black
Thoughts:  In the interest in transparency in our reviews I think it’s important to say we contributed to the design of this rim, producing what we feel is the most balanced rim on the market.  The SL23 is claimed at 23mm wide but we measure it closer to 24mm.  It also has the widest internal width of all the rims in the review.  Overall a shape similar to the Hed, but with a better price, better weight, wider width and full range of drillings we think this will be one of the most popular aftermarket rims for the coming year.  The rim also has a heavily machined brake surface that provides smooth, consistent braking, and a wear indicator.   The SL23 is also listed as tubeless friendly, having been tested as tubeless with wider and lower pressure tires we feel this rim will be a great choice for cx riders looking to go tubeless at low pressure.

Eric: I’ve been riding a pre-production rim for a while now and I’ve had no issues.  It’s a new rim on the market, but very well designed and I have a good feeling it will test more aero than any other rim only option here.  My Michelin 23mm tires are exactly as wide as the rim so there is a very smooth transition from tire to brake track.   The Micheline Pro 4 25mm measures a plump 27mm on this rim..  At 80-85psi you are really threatening the ride quality of even the better tubular wheel/tire combinations out there.  This will be my really bad road/gravel setup for the road bike.
————————————————————–

Stans 340:
Weight: 389 grams
Price: $120
Depth: 23mm
Width: 20mm
Internal width: 17mm
Drillings: 18, 20, 24, 28, 32
Colors: Black
Thoughts: We were not a fan of version 1 of the 340 having seen lots of issues with it which we feel Stans was slow to respond to.  However we have to say the newer and heavier version 2 seems to be a good improvement.  Not considered a wide rim by external dimensions, the internal dimension does indeed fall into the wide rim category making it a unique balance.  We have found Stans to have a less than stellar warranty and customer service so that is something to consider.   This rim is listed as tubeless and it has been successfully used as such, it is also important to note that there have been reports of tires coming off of the rim(both in tubeless and tubed versions).  Most of these reports seem to be version 1, but a couple have claimed this with version 2.

Eric:  They are more expensive than the XR-19, but the dimensions are better, the alloy is better and the rims are more straight and true to begin with.  If someone is trying build up a set of premium hubs out there from the likes of Tune, Alchemy, White Industries or Chris King, I think the additional cost is money well spent over the life of the wheels.  If the rims are being used in the wet, consider that they have less brake track and will wear out faster than some other rims.

———————————————————

Velocity A23:
Weight: 452 grams
Price: $80
Depth: 19mm
Width: 23mm
Internal width: 17.5
Drillings: 20, 24, 28, 32, 36
Colors: Black, blue, green, orange, purple, red, silver
Thoughts:  Overall a decent rim with good dimensions, but lacking in the stiffness department.  Good internal and external widths.  If you want a wide rim with a low weight this is a good choice but it does come with the trade off in the stiffness compared to other wide rims and typically should be considered in higher spoke counts.  Available in plenty of drillings and plenty of colors.

Eric: I wish I didn’t have to clean out the rims before building them.  They always have some shavings in them from drilling the spoke holes.  Minor inconvenience, but worth noting.  Velocity is working on having anodizing done in-house.  Until then, anodized rim inventory is spotty and the wait time is unpredictable.  They do build up okay.  Once out on the road they should give lots of trouble free miles.  I do think they are one tier down from the quality I get from DT, Hed, Pacenti and H+Son.  The price has slowly been creeping up there into the elite rim category.

————————————————–

Zipp 101:
Weight: 536 grams
Price: $160
Depth: 30mm
Width: 24mm
Internal Width: 17.5mm
Drillings: 18, 20, 24
Colors: Black
Thoughts:  Not available as an aftermarket rim on it’s own the Zipp 101 was included for comparison sake.  This is the deepest of the wide rims but also the heaviest of any rim in the review, by a good margin.  The 101 is a stout rim that builds up nicely and it has a lot “coolness factor”  It’s the only toroidal shaped rim in the review which is claimed to improve aerodynamics but in these depths we doubt the difference is substantial.  If purchased as a replacement rim for a set of 101’s the rim will set you back quite a bit.  My opinion is that this is the crossover where one should consider carbon alternatives.

Eric: I would have thought that Zipp would have made this rim significantly lighter, but they chose a low spoke count instead (18f 20r for stock build) and set the rider weight limit at 250lbs.  This is a poor choice as a result.  They could have knocked 50g off the rims and made the spoke count 20/24 with a stallion option of 20/28 and had a better offering for their wheel lineup.

Summary: We realize that we’ve not covered every aspect of rim design nor have we gone too in depth into the qualities and drawbacks of each rim.  We do however feel that this should provide a solid foundation for helping you to choose a rim which best fits your own personal needs.  Mixed with our previous hub reviews, 11 speed conversion review, and future spoke review we feel that you should be well informed about the basic differences in components that go into making an ideal custom wheel.

The post 2013 Rim Roundup appeared first on Fair Wheel Bikes.

The randomly chosen reviewer will have to post a review on a popular cycling site within 30 days of receiving the item (weight weenies, roadbikereview, mountain bike review, bikeforums etc…) Reviews do not need to be positive, just honest. You will also be required to email us a link to your posted review.  Failure to do any of these will eliminate you from being chosen to review any future products.

These items we send out for review will most often be used.  Sometimes they may be new if we got multiples to test, or they may be only slightly used.  As second hand items they have no warranty or guarantees.

We ask that the reviewer after writing their review either keep and use the item and update his online review occasionally or pass it on to someone else at no charge with the requirement that they write a review somewhere.

To enter your name simply post a comment to this article.  While posting you will be asked for your email address, please use a correct address as this is how we will contact you.  (Be assured we will not sell your email address or use it to send spam.)

These cages are for use with road or mtb, so there are no restrictions on the type of suitable riding.

Additional entries can be attained by liking the FWB page on Facebook, and by sharing the Facebook post about this review contest on your Facebook page.

Finally, the drawing will take place Monday, January 28th.

The post Want to test the latest New Ultimate bottle cage? appeared first on Fair Wheel Bikes.

The idea, it has to begin with the idea.  Sometimes I try to give myself ideas by leaving things on my desk or hanging on the wall where I can see it in hopes that at some point the idea comes.  This fails as often as it succeeds, as an example I have a 50th anniversary Colin Lange custom that’s been hanging on the wall for almost 10 years waiting for the idea to come, which it still hasn’t.  Other times it seems to come quick.  The quick ones tend to be the best as everything just seems to fall into place easily and naturally.

This project is one that came quickly.  A new frame had just shown up and I was trying to come up with a wheelset and found myself frustrated by the lack of light parts for pure race bikes.  Why in the 30 years that I’ve been riding Bmx bikes has the weight of a race bike not changed like it has in other categories of cycling.  Sitting on my desk at that time was a Tune Mag150 hub, that’s when the thought came,  “If this is suitable for mountain biking, why can’t a version be done for bmx?”  So with that thought and the notion of cost be damned, this project to build the worlds lightest Pro XL bmx bike for a grown up was born.

Keeping motivated can sometimes be a challenge with a long project build so it’s important to feel some progress right away to get excited.  That means this was the time to start, besides it gave me less of a chance to think that maybe this was an absurd idea.  I took the hub in hand, thought for a few minutes and then headed to the work bench to start.

The first thought was the freehub body, both size and durability were an issue.  As a solution I grabbed a Tune Single speeder hub and removed the single cog titanium freehub body to see how it fit to the 150, the fit was perfect as I thought it would be.  Next the axle length had to be considered, because the 150 uses a carbon fiber axle with press fit end caps, shortening the length would be easy.  The bigger challenge was coming up with proper length end caps to allow the hub to stay without dish and keep a proper chainline at the same time that the overall length was decreased.  I had an assortment of Tune end caps from road and mtb hubs to work with and made up the difference with a fairly minimal custom spacer.  At this point it was just a matter of assembling the hub and checking the dimensions to make sure everything was correct.  It wasn’t.  Measure twice cut once, there’s a reason that’s a good rule, this time at least it was only a $100 screw up.  Double check my numbers, grab another carbon axle and cut it.  Check again to see if it was proper and this time  It was, which meant the hub could be taken back apart and the details could be considered.  Again with durability and performance in mind the skyline titanium pawls were removed and replaced with stainless steel.  The stainless bearings were also removed and replaced with HSC full ceramic.  The last piece was the titanium drive ring.  The stock 24 tooth drive ring was removed and replaced with a custom made steel 36 tooth drive ring, producing faster engagement of the freehub body.  (Special thanks to Jeremy at Alchemy for producing the custom drive ring.)  The hub was reassembled and of course the weight was checked, 146.3 grams, definitely the lightest cassette hub ever made for bmx.

At this point I sent pics and specs to Harry at Tune to show him what I had come up with and ask his opinion.  He took them over to Uli (owner and engineer at Tune) and together they looked at it and decided that it was a solid start.  The one concern which we all shared was the carbon axle.  Uli offered to produce a one-off version of the hub for me using the changes I had made.  The new production hub was changed to a custom made alloy axle and end caps that did not require a spacer to attain the proper spacing.   This one off hub also had to be reinforced and drilled for the appropriate 32 spokes.

While making the new rear hub, Uli also came up with a matching Mig45 front hub.  At 60.7 grams the front is heavier than a stock Mig45 but it’s reinforced to handle the rigors of bmx racing.  Remember this is a without regard to budget build so here’s how the pricing breaks down.  The stock Mag150 was $785, the Singlespeeder which was salvaged for parts was another $615, misc end caps for $30, custom drive ring at $60, the extra axle to replace the one I cut wrong added $100 and  4 HSC full ceramic bearings at $90 each puts the retail price of the rear hub at a pretty staggering $1950.  Tune will in all likelihood begin to offer this hub as a stock item, with stainless bearings and without having to use two hubs to build one, the pricing should drop to just a little more than a stock Mag150.

Of course now that we have the hubs, we have to do something equally special for rims, spokes and nipples.  A couple calls were placed to see what we could turn up and we’ve got what we consider to be worthy components to finish this build, but that will have to wait for another day.

The post Project BMX Part 1 appeared first on Fair Wheel Bikes.

Alchemy Orc

The Orc was originally designed to have the largest possible drive side offset.   Because Alchemy would like to continue with this idea of optimization there will be no conversion kits manufactured for current 10 speed hubs.  Alchemy will however release a new version of the ORC for Shimano 11 speed.  Release date is currently set in Feb.  and we do know that the Shimano 11 hub will be the first Orc UL version that gets released this year.  Being as the hub is not done there isn’t a lot of information that we are allowed to share.  We do know that there will be 3 versions (Shimano 11, Shimano 10 and Campag 11) Each being designed to take advantage of maximum possible drive side offset.  We do know that the hub will keep it’s previous 131mm OLN dimension and a drive side offset of about 18mm.

Feb 2013 Update

We’ve heard the ORC is shipping late Feb.  We’ve had some indications that availability in some quantity is likely.  We’re going to, of course, let you know about the new hubs as soon as we can.  Pick your poison but the best ways to get the most up to date information from us is on: Twitter, Facebook, Jason’s (MadCow) Facebook or through our monthly newsletter.  If you’re on any of those you will be the first to know.

Chris King R45

Chris King will soon offer the R45 as a complete hub compatible with Shimano 11 and will also offer a conversion kit for existing R45 hubs.  Complete hubs look like they should be available the 15th of Jan, while conversion kits should be available about the same time or shortly thereafter.  The King conversion kit will have the freehub body, end caps and axle.  Converting existing hubs will require a re-dishing of the wheel.  The drive side offset will be reduced down to 17.1mm.

Feb 2013 Update

Chris King’s R45 hubs are now shipping from Chris King as 11 speed compatible. The CK 11-speed conversion kit is also available for $258.

DT240

Dt-Swiss will manufacture hubs and conversion kits.  Complete hubs and conversion kits are already available for both the 350 and 240.  DT is one of the few hubs that can make the change from Shimano 10 to Shimano 11 without any required re-dishing of the wheel.  The OLN spacing of the DT has been disputed a bit but despite what some might say DT is using the 131 mm spacing.  One of our complaints in the past about DT hubs was that it had less offset than many competitors on the drive side, however in going to 11 speed this has worked in their favor allowing for the change to take place pretty seamlessly.     And when looking at 11 speed hubs the 16.9mm drive side offset is now on par with almost every other high end hub.  The DT kit includes a new freehub body and end cap.

Feb 2013 Update

All DT-Swiss Hubs are available as 11-speed hubs.

Extralite SX, SLX, SPX

Extalite will offer both 10 and 11 speed specific hubs going forward with 10 speed versions keeping the better drive side offsets.  Conversion kits are available for both V1.0 and V2.0 of the SX, SLX and SPX.  However it should be noted that converting Extralite hubs is a pretty involved process that requires a high amount of mechanical ability as well as special tools.  Extralite offers a 131mm Shimano 11 speed conversion kit which helps keep the drive side offset from decreasing as much, keeping it right at 17mm.  There is also a 130mm conversion which reduces the offset yet again.  Using either conversion kit requires re-dishing of the wheel, but the 131mm requires less change to wheel dish.  Conversion kits are currently available.

Feb 2013 Update

Extralite Hubs and conversion kits are available for sale from Extralite now.  Future shipments will be 9000 and 9070 compatible.

Tune Mag 170

Tune will offer complete 11 speed compatible hubs and conversion kits for existing Mag 170 hubs starting at the end of Jan.  The 11 speed body will be visibly recognizable  by a small groove machined around the end of the body.  Tune conversion kits will be for 131mm spacing and will require a slight re-dish of the wheel.  The kits will include freehub bodies, end cap, and bearings as well as 4 shims.  Tune along with Alchemy will now have the largest drive side offset that we know of for 11 speed Shimano, managing to keep their current 18mm drive side offset.  The conversion kits will be available in two versions, the standard and the skyline.  Standard would be the version for the 170 with the Skyline being the lighter body of the 150.  Older hubs with the 15mm axles will not be convertible.

Feb 2013 Update

Tune 170 conversion kits will be available in two weeks.  The Mag 170 will begin shipping as either 11-speed or 10-speed compatible as well.

White Industries H3

The White Industries The H3 hub is convertible to Shimano 11, conversion kits are currently available and will require a re-dish.  The H3 will no longer be produced, but W.I. has released a new Shimano 11 speed hub called the T11 which is already currently available.  The new T11 drops the drive side offset down to 16mm making it the least drive side offset and lowest tension ratio of all the above listed hubs.  It does however have almost largest left side offset except for the Alchemy.  On the upside this does mean that W.I hubs are now fully interchangeable between Shimano and Campag 11 without a required redish.

Building dimension comparison

Obviously an 11 speed drivetrain requires sacrifice to accommodate for the larger cassette stack.  So as an example of how the hubs compare in a complete wheel here are avg bracing angles and tension ratios for all the above hubs.  Based on an ERD of 587, 24 spoke 2x/2x.

The post Hub Conversions for Shimano 11 Speed appeared first on Fair Wheel Bikes.

AX-Lightness, Road only

Thoughts:  Mixed materials in the skewer rods, titanium rear and aluminum front.The alloy front shaft accounts for a 2 or 3 gram weight savings which really doesn’t make a difference except when weight is the ultimate goal, however if weight is the ultimate goal there are lighter choices.  I do really like the handle shape and length on the Ax skewer.  It provides plenty of leverage and is easy on the hand.  The skewer uses a fine pitch thread for small adjustments and what should be solid retention however the nuts are sometimes lax in tolerance as we’ve seen a few that have stripped threads where others would not have.

Enve Road Titanium

Thoughts: The heaviest and least expensive of the titanium skewers in this review.  The external cam is linear rather than a cup like some so alignment must be done manually. The handle is a really nice length and shape, easy on the hand and opens and closes easily and securely.  At the price it is a nice aftermarket option, but was designed to be OE with Enve wheels, and in that case it matches well.

Extralite Aliens3

Thoughts:  4 years ago when I wrote the last skewer review, the Aliens2 was one of my favorites.  The Aliens3 is brand new, released only this month.  It doesn’t make dramatic changes from the last version, but some nice details to what was already a truly fantastic skewer.  The cam changes from gold to black giving it a more consistent look.   The nut becomes an integrated 3 piece design with a fixed spring, rotating washer and nut.  All 3 pieces rotate individually but stay together as one piece on the skewer.  The attention to engineering detail on this skewer is off the chart.  An external cam as in common in most skewers, but with a very clever fixing mechanism which keeps it from moving and having to be manually aligned.  Also a retention device for the springs on both ends means that this is perhaps the quickest and easiest skewer to use when it comes to a speedy wheel change.  A knurled nut and a long ergonomic handle on the lever end make this super friendly on the hands and provide plenty of clamping force.   Suitable for road or mtb.  It’s not the lightest, in fact it’s one of the heaviest in this review, but it’s also one of the overall best in every other category.

Extralite Streeters

Thoughts: Given that the Aliens3 is a universal skewer with all the bells and whistles, Extralite thought they should have a weight oriented road specific skewer as well and recently released one.  The Streeter keeps the same basic external cam design of the Aliens3 but strips away all the bells and whistles making this the 2nd lightest skewer in the review.  At 29 grams only the carbon rod version Tune is lighter.  The Streeter looses the springs, large knurled nut and wide smooth handle in favor of weight savings.  Also the cam plate gets smaller.  Cam travel however is increased.  Overall this is a really nice lightweight skewer with good funtion.

Far and Near Carbon Road

Thoughts:  Very similar in design to the original Kcnc.  It has a long handle and good retention.  Very basic and trouble free design.  Handle is comfortable to grip for both closing and opening which is a good thing being that this skewer has one of the largest cam movements of all the skewers.  Solid clamping force and overall nice design at a good price.  The carbon wrap over the handle sometimes has a bit of a laminate look which won’t appeal to everyone.  But functionally there is nothing to fault here.

Kcnc Stainless Z6

Thoughts: This is the first choice when it comes to weight vs price.  Lighter than almost all other steel skewers, and still at a reasonable price.  The Z6 has recently been updated with the addition of a coating on the brass cam to reduce noise and make operation smoother.  A friendly shape handle, but like the original ti version it’s on the shorter side so does require more hand strength when opening and closing.

Kcnc Titanium Road

Thoughts:  This is one of the best selling lightweight skewers of all time.  It mixes the traits very well and for this year has received several updates.  Like the Z6 this one also includes the coating on the brass plate to quiet and smooth out operation.  More importantly the handle has been lengthened by 5mm which we feel makes a lot of difference.  That was our only real complaint with the original and now it’s even better.  Secure clamping, easy function and easy on the hand.  Weight, performance and price considered this has to be one of the best on the market.

Kcnc Groove Road

Thoughts: This is a lightened version of the Kcnc Ti road.  It is identical to the Ti road but with two changes.  The main change is that the titanium shaft is machined out on 4 sides which shaves 5 grams of weight.  The other is that the logos are changed to gold.  Overall this is just as good a skewer as the standard ti but with less weight and an increase in price.

New Ultimate Road

Thoughts: The New Ultimate also has a mixed shaft, titanium rear and aluminum front.  Similar design with a ball and brass socket cam to Kcnc and Far and Near.  The New Ultimate has one of the nicest looking shapes on the handle, but at the same time one of the least friendly on hand.  The skewer works well and is reliable, but in my opinion it’s real strength is in how it looks.  It’s especially nice that it is available in white which is something hard to find in skewers.

Shimano Dura Ace 9000

Thoughts: The 9000 skewer is big, heavy and expensive, but it works like nothing else.  At 2 to 3 times the weight of all the other skewers in the review this one seems a bit out of place.  It’s here to show differences from mainstream to more unique brands.  Shimano does not design skewers to be light, they design them to be functional.  With that in mind it’s a total success.  It’s handle is the easiest of all on the hand making it the most comfortable to use.  Clamping strength on the Dura Ace skewer is unmatched by virtually anything in the market which is why many trials riders choose them to hold their wheels in place.  If weight, price and aesthetics are of no concern and the only thing that matters is performance this is a good choice.

Soul Kozak Road Titanium

Thoughts: The Soul Kozak skewer has a large cam movement of of 2.7mm, the most of the test making it quicker to operate with lawyer tabs.  It has a nicely butted titanium shaft and a good looking handle.  However this is the only skewer in the review that requires manual alignment of the cam pieces and has too shallow of a cam plate (plastic insert) and a nut that is awkward to adjust.  It’s a great looking skewer with secure clamping force, but it does take longer than others to operate.

Tune DC14 Road

Thoughts:  When this skewer first came out I remember looking at it and thinking, “wow that tiny little carbon handle is going to snap if someone over tightens it.”  I’m glad to say that here we are a couple years later and we’ve never seen or heard of a broken one.  This skewer is my favorite in terms of look.  A ton of different colors with a minimalist looking carbon handle means it looks good on any bike.   The thin handle seems as though it should be harder to open and close, but the length makes it perfectly functional.  It’s easy on the hand, has a nut that grips well and clamps securely.  It uses a butted titanium rear and a butted aluminum front shaft.

Tune U20

Thoughts:  When weight is the bottom line, this is really the only choice.   At 22 grams there is no other quick release skewer equal in weight that I am aware of.  Like all the other skewers in the review there is no weight limit on them even given their light weight nature.  These are truly show pieces and deserving of being seen outside of a hub where they can be appreciated, but that also comes at a hefty price.

The post 12 High End Skewers Reviewed appeared first on Fair Wheel Bikes.

Running Changes at Alchemy

Before getting into the new hubs there are a couple mid-year changes to address. First off, the Alchemy ELF will make a running change toward Phil Wood stainless bearings. The new bearing does not feature the Marine grade seals — striking a compromise between seal drag and bearing life. The new bearings are expected to last longer than the current version given the increased quality of manufacturing, but will maintain the same level of bearing drag. The other running change happened several months ago which was a 1mm enlargement of the flange O.D. with no change in the spoke hole diameter. This resulted in a reinforced and stronger flange.

The New ORC, ORC-UL

***The ORC-UL is now in stock!

The new ORC-UL will come in 3 versions: a Campagnolo 10/11 speed version, a Shimano 11sp version and a Shimano 8/9/10 version, which will optimize flange spacing for drivetrains with up to 10 cogs. The new ORC-UL is expected to shed a significant amount of weight coming in at a very respectable 189 grams. The most notable upgrade to the ORC-UL is what Alchemy refers to as an innovative way to eliminate the unsupported portion of the axle. While they haven’t released all the details yet, we understand that this is done by extending the hub shell under the cassette body, thus moving the drive side hub shell bearing out to 11.7mm from the dropout. Standard hubs place this bearing about 42mm from the dropout at best, leaving a large portion of the axle unsupported. According to Alchemy this is what allows the hub to lose thirty grams while increasing rigidity. In addition, the new freehub bodies will be hard anodized which should reduce gouging due to cassette cogs.

Wheel Building Dimensions

The Shimano and Campagnolo 11 speed versions of the ORC-UL will share the same dimensions, so swapping Campagnolo and Shimano 11 freehub bodies won’t require any re-dishing. The Shimano 8/9/10sp version will have a shorter free hub body to decrease rear wheel dish, so any change between the 10 speed and 11 speed versions will require a wheel re-dishing.

ORC-UL Image Gallery

ELF

The current ELF will continue to be the mainstay front hub, but there will be a new model added to the lineup. This new version of the ELF is focused on aerodynamics. This hub is intended to be released after the ORC-UL and there aren’t a lot of details revealed to us just yet. The aero hub will use straight pull spokes and the projected weight is under 45 grams. It will be available in drillings of 16-24 holes.

Mountain Hubs

Shortly after releasing the three versions of the ORC-UL designs, Alchemy’s first mountain bike hubset is expected for release. The hubs are disc brake compatible and will feature the same internals as the new ORC-UL. This means a stiffer mountain bike hub with a better supported axle, at around 220 grams.

The post Alchemy Bicycle Works Update appeared first on Fair Wheel Bikes.

The specs were compiled by us here at Fair Wheel and Ron at White Mountain Wheels, and while we did do our best to be careful there were an awful lot of numbers and calculations thrown around over those days. So with that in mind I’d like to put out the disclaimer that it isn’t impossible that we might have transcribed, written or recorded a number incorrectly. So please forgive any typos or mistakes. We’ve already corrected a ton and now like to think that most things should be correct, but with the scale of this thing it’s still possible that one will find a mistake.

Considerations when choosing a hubset: It’s important to understand that there is no one perfect hub.  Each hub has its own unique strengths and weaknesses.  That’s where a good custom wheel builder comes into play, helping you decide what best fits your needs.  So a hub that is right for one person may not be the right hub for another.  We’ve never found one hub that fits all needs ideally.  With the combination of those of us writing this review, we estimate we’ve built 20,000 pairs of wheels, so it’s safe to say we’ve had a fair amount of experience.  There are certainly hubs that could be used by any rider, but that doesn’t necessarily make them ideal for everyone.  Just like being under-built, a wheel can also be over-built for a rider and their needs.  We consider all the hubs in this review to be “good” hubs. That means they have a good design, quality control, reliability, service, etc… and each is capable of being a top choice in a particular application. But every design is a collection of optimizations and compromises, and every rider has different priorities. Things like price, weight, resistance, durability, ease of service, branding, and looks, are all considerations… along with the spokes and rim selection and the intended purpose of the wheelset.  The idea is to balance the characteristics that are most important to one given rider.  Hopefully this review will help to point you in the direction of the hubs that will work best for you.

Durability is one important aspect, and also the most difficult to nail down. A hubset might be lighter than another due to better design and materials, but there can also be tradeoffs like smaller bearings, and simply thinner or weaker parts. Ultimately long term experience is the best indicator, but that isn’t a lot of help when a new or altered design comes on the market. To further complicate matters, the QC can be variable, so even an old design that was previously solid can have random issues. Even determining the kind of forces a rider might put on their wheels is complicated. Some 240 lb riders would have no issues with a hubset that some 120 lb riders would destroy. Rider weight is one important aspect, but so is riding style, so the rider’s previous experience with equipment needs to be considered.  Also, a rider might be fine with durability compromises on their 12 lb climbing bike, but have a completely different set of requirements on a regular bike that is ridden in all sorts of weather.

Bearing material: this is what comes stock in the base model. Some hubs have upgrades available from the factory.

Bearing size: moving from left to right in the hub shell and then in the hub body.

Static load: Combined static load for the hub shell and again for the freehub body.  Static load rating is the maximum amount of load a bearing can take without excessive deformation that would degrade the bearing performance.

Notes on Bearings and drag: Since ceramic bearings became the rage a several years ago, bearing drag has been a hot topic among cyclists. Unfortunately, there doesn’t seem to be much public information on just how much of a loss the wheel bearing drag contributes. According to Bicycle Science the drag of clean, lubricated, properly aligned and adjusted ball bearings is very small. The friction coefficient is ~.0015… which is the ratio of resistive force generated in the bearing divided by the load it is carrying. If you are familiar with tire rolling resistance coefficients, this functions in the same way… except that you need to multiply this force by the bearing/wheel radius to get a comparable factor. So lets say we have a hub with 15mm axle, and the bearings are on a radius of ~12mm. The wheel’s radius is ~335mm, so 12/335 *.0015 gives us an equivalent rolling resistance coefficient of .000054. To give you an idea of how small this is, typical tire rolling resistance coefficient is about .005… so the bearing resistance is ~100 times smaller. Another way to look at it is that a 200lb rider+bike traveling at 25mph will lose ~0.5W from the bearing rolling resistance. And these are not fancy bearings we are talking about… just decent steel ones.

There is another major component to bearing drag though, and that is the resistance of the seals. John Swanson did some interesting coast-down tests of wheels shown here: http://www.bikephysics.com/rails/wheel/list Aerodynamic drag was part of it, but his instrumentation was sophisticated enough to back out the bearing drag alone. Ron did the calculations on the bearing coefficients he obtained, and got an average power consumption of 0.25W for front hubs and 0.40W for the rear hubs at 25mph… or 0.65W for both wheels. Note that there was a lot of variation, but even the worst set of wheels was only ~1.3W. Since the only load in his tests was the weight of the wheel we’d consider these values additive to the 0.5W determined above… so typical losses are about 1.2W total. Though the losses in this test would capture any effects of misalignment or preload in the unloaded state, we should point out that under typical loads these factors can result in additional friction.

Does this mean that bearings don’t matter? We wouldn’t say that. Instead we’d emphasize that the most important factors are cleanliness, adequate lubrication, alignment, and adjustment. If any of these are off, then the drag can be much higher. Even though smaller bearings might have lower resistance in an ideal world, larger bearings (higher load rating) will be more tolerant of un-ideal situations, probably resulting in a lower practical resistance in addition to a longer life span. If your typical hub set in good condition is only consuming ~1W then be realistic about how much improvement is possible. The added expense of ceramic bearings and the added hassle of having light seals and grease (which probably will result in quicker bearing contamination and more frequent replacement) may not be worth it.

Axle diameter: Larger axles will typically produce stiffer wheels. It’s also important to note that a couple of axles are in different ways, butted or reinforced at the freehub body in the rear to help prevent cantilevering under acceleration.

Price: This is the msrp as it applies in the USA.

Flange diameters: Left / Right. As measured by us from center of spoke hole to center of spoke hole. A note or two on flange diameter. The biggest effect of flange diameter comes particularly from the drive side and in the form of torque transfer and a wheel’s ability to resist wind up during acceleration. Typically a larger flange will produce a better result in this category.

Center to flange: As measured by us. It’s been noticed that many of our numbers don’t match what is claimed by manufacturers. Our measurements are taken from center of flange to locknut. Some manufacturers provide outside of flange to center, while others provide numbers for both inside and outside but nothing center. Also some manufacturers may assume a 130 oln when their axle is not exactly 130. We use the actual oln measurement for our calculations. After the flange to center number is calculated it is rounded to 0.5mm.

Bracing angle: Based on a build using Kinlin XR300, 2x. Of course not all of these hubs would be recommended to be laced 2x, and with some it isn’t even possible. This was just a way to create an equalizer to show the differences in the hubs on a level playing field. Actual bracing angles and tension differences will vary based on the build.

Notes on Bracing angle: Bracing angle (or flange offset) is the most important factor effecting the lateral stiffness and stability of the wheel. The lateral stiffness imparted by the spokes goes up with the *square* of the bracing angles, while using more or heavier spokes only results in a linear increase in stiffness… and an increase in weight.

On a front wheel it isn’t difficult to get adequate offsets and stiffness. The limit is having clearance for the fork, and offsets of up to 40mm are usually fine… the wider the better the lateral stiffness will be. There has been some speculation that narrower spacings are more aerodynamic. It is also possible that a very flexible rim might experience a lateral wave if the combination of high tension and bracing angle and low spoke count were severe enough.

Bracing presents a conundrum on the rear wheel though, since the position of the DS flange is dictated by the 130mm dropout spacing, the wide cassette, and providing clearance for the derailleur. Because of this the spacing from the center of the wheel (and rim) is “stuck” being only ~16-19mm from the DS flange with a 130mm dropout width. Campy hubs are generally in the 16-17mm range due to their wider cassettes, and Shimano/SRAM specific hubs *can* be in the 18-19mm range. Yes, Campy hubs (and the new Shimano 11 hubs) are inherently disadvantaged when it comes to making a stiff wheel. You would always like to get the DS offset as great as possible, with the practical limit being a minimal clearance between the spokes and derailleur.

The spacing on the NDS can be whatever the hub manufacturer wants. If it the same as the DS, then both sides will have the same tension… but lateral stiffness and overall stability will be very low. If it is twice as large… say 36mm… the NDS tension will be *half* as great as the DS, but lateral stiffness will be ok. The dilemma here is that a high bracing angle is good for lateral strength and stability, but lower tension on the NDS could cause these spokes to go slack when subjected to high radial loads. When spokes go slack the stiffness of the wheel goes way down and bad things can happen… from spokes coming loose due to nipples unwinding, to “taco”, wheel failure, etc.

So as you can see, the trick here is to find the best compromise. The hub manufacturers have different ideas about what is best, with the NDS offsets of the conventional hubs in this review ranging from 32.5 to 42mm. The DT’s geometry is inherently the least stiff with only ~16mm on the DS and 32.5mm on the NDS. Compare this to the Alchemy hub in Shimano 10 configuration with a DS offset of 19.5mm and NDS offset of 37mm. My back of the envelope calculation gives the Alchemy hub ~25% improvement in lateral wheel stiffness compared to the DT. The Alchemy hub also has a higher tension ratio, so there is no downside. In the DT’s favor the freehub is easily swappable between Campy and Shimano without re-dishing, which is why it has a poor DS spacing for an S hub (because it actually uses Campag spacing). Other hubs like the Campy versions of the White Industries H3, and Extralite have large NDS offsets, so the stiffness is good… but tension ratios in the 42% range can leave the NDS tension lower than ideal, and is especially troublesome if the rim will not allow high tension on the DS. If the hub allows radial lacing though, lacing the NDS heads-out will improve the tension ratio.

Triplet lacing:  Another approach to solving the issue of bracing angle and spoke tension on rear wheels is one that we think will become more prevalent as Shimano 11 speed with its Campag like dimensions takes hold in the market in coming years.  The triplet or 2:1 lacing pattern on a rear wheel features 2 drive spokes for every 1 non-drive spoke. Because the non-drive side spoke head sits further out from the centerline of the hub it has lower spoke tension — typical non-drive side spokes may have only 45-50% of the tension of the drive side. On a  24h triplet rear wheel. You have 16 drive spokes and 8 non drive spokes. When you take away half of the non drive spokes the ones that are left have to pull twice as hard against the drive side spokes — effectively doubling the tension on the non-drive side. So if the non-drive was only 45% of the drive side and the triplet pattern doubles the tension on the non drive it is now only a 10% difference. Another benefit of the triplet pattern is that the drive side spokes are tangent which makes for the most efficient power transfer.

Like with all things compromises come with tradeoffs. One is that because you take away half of the spokes on one side of the wheel you lose lateral stiffness. To compensate for this you need a hub that has a wide flange spacing, ideally designed for triplet use.  Another is that the rim needs to be stiff and center-drilled (holes not offset towards the flanges), which can limit rim choice. Also, if one of the NDS spokes happens to break, the rim could warp in an extreme way. None of the hubs in this review were specifically designed for triplet lacing.

The case for lighter spokes: There is an alternative to triplet lacing that can also address this issue; using heavier spokes on the DS and lighter (less stiff) spokes on the NDS, along with a higher NDS offset. Using lighter spokes increases their static “stretch” with a given amount of tension, and a small increase in the NDS offset can get back the lateral stiffness that would ordinarily be lost due to using lighter spokes.

There are now viable options in extra light stainless steel aero spokes (Sapim CX Super, and Pillar Mega Lite SS), plus a titanium spoke that is lighter still (Pillar Xtra Lite Ti). The stainless spokes are about 82% of the weight and stiffness of a CX-Ray while the Ti is about 60%.

Ordinarily we’d pick an NDS/DS bracing angle ratio of ~2.0 as being the best compromise for wheel strength and integrity. If we assume that the DS offset is 17mm for C11 and S11 hubs, then this is ~34mm. But if you used spokes that are 82% as stiff on the NDS, this would be increased to 2.2 (37.5mm) to retain the same lateral stiffness. For NDS spokes with 60% stiffness it would be 2.6 (44mm). In both of these cases you could increase the DS offset a bit more (and have improved lateral stiffness) and still have improved resistance to spokes going slack.

Hub shell material: Even though not every manufacturer will state the alloy they use, most manufacturers use a very high strength alloy (usually 7000 series), and at first glance this seems like a good idea. Stronger is better, right? In some applications though, we believe that 6061 might be a better choice. The reason is that 6061 has higher corrosion resistance, and more importantly resistance to something called “stress corrosion cracking”. The spokes exert concentrated and variable forces at the holes in the hub flanges, and high strength is a less important factor than ductility and corrosion resistance. Another advantage is that the softer alloy will deform more readily providing better support for the spoke in the flange. If you live and ride in a particularly corrosive area, anodized 6061 hubshells would likely last the longest. As far as we know, only White Industries and Alchemy use this alloy.  Chris King won’t divulge the series of alloy they use for their hubshells stating only that it is proprietary.

Shimano 11 speed:  The new Dura Ace 11 speed cassettes will be wider by 1.85mm. This breaks with their tradition of keeping the cassette width about the same as they went from 8 speed, to 9, and then 10. The wider cassette will reduce the DS offset a similar amount, all else being equal.

At this point we don’t see any reason why you would not be able to upgrade your existing S10 hubs to S11 with an appropriate kit that includes new axle spacers and freehub, provided that your hub manufacturer makes this kit available. The likely parts and changes that will be needed, starting with your current hub configuration, are:
-If your S10 hub was designed to optimize dish (ie it could *not* be easily switched between C and S with a simple freehub swap) then a redish will also be necessary.
-If your S10 hub *can* be easily swapped between C and S, then installing an S11 freehub should not require a redish.
-Switching from C11 to S11 will of course require a new freehub, but may not require different spacers, and should not require a redish.
S11 freehubs will also accept S8, S9, and S10 cassettes with a spacer installed before the cassette.

Captured bearing vs free axle: These are two popular methods of hub design. Captured bearing means that the inner race of the bearings have a solid lateral support between them, either via shoulders on the axle or spacers that slide on the axle and join adjacent bearings together. The outer race is constrained in all cases by a press-fit inside the hubshell or freehub. In this design, the outer caps typically slide on and press directly on the inner race of the outer bearings, and no adjustment is necessary.

In the free axle design there are no lateral constraints on the inner races except for the external axle caps, one of which will be adjustable. If the adjustable end is removed, the axle can be slid out the other side. The adjustment is accomplished with either a threaded collar, a sliding collar with set screw, the cap itself threads onto the axle, or shims are used.

Either method can work well. With captured bearings the tolerances must be nearly perfect, else there will be a lateral preload on some or all of the bearings that will increase drag and wear. This is the biggest drawback. Some manufacturers have had more success with this than others. In this review DT, Soul-Kozak, and Powertap use this method.

With a free axle the lateral tolerances between bearings are not important, but the hub must be precisely adjusted, else there will be either a preload or excessive play. Also the outer bearings in this design are required to take all lateral loads (including preload if there is any). It is better to adjust these hubs with a little extra play rather than too tight. Either a threaded or sliding collar that allows for adjustment while the QR is installed, is a good feature to have with this type of hub… otherwise you must adjust with a little extra play to allow for QR compression.

Note that other aspects of hub design can also have substantial effects on wheel stiffness. Axle and shell stiffness, bearing size, tolerance, and arrangement, bearing to axle interface stiffness, and axle to dropout interface stiffness, are all important factors. Unfortunately, quantifying these is beyond the scope of this review

A note on tools:  When we talk about tools we will be talking about special tools. It will be assumed that a bearing puller and press is part of a standard tool kit. For the bearing press, we highly recommend the Wizard from Wheels Manufacturing, but designed by Jeremy from Alchemy. This is truly the most versatile press ever and with details such as an internally threaded shaft it’s uses go far beyond being a standard bearing press. We use it to pull axles, install axles, bearings, freehub bodies etc…

Front Hubs

Now let’s get things started. Since many people mix front and rear hub brands we are going to look at them separately. So, on to the hubs…..

Alchemy Elf

FWB Opinion: At 66grams the fits nicely into the mid-lightweight hubs. The Elf axle has been changed from a captured bearing design with a 12mm axle to a 10mm adjustable and sliding axle. The large bearings static capacity is high, and the flange spacing is the widest of just about anything we’ve seen. The bearing placement is about as far outboard as a front hub can tolerate and still have room to clear the fork. That extra bearing width should contribute to an even stiffer front wheel. Combine all of those factors with allowed radial lacing and you have the hub that is likely to produce the laterally stiffest wheel available. The hub has also recently had the flange OD increased by 1mm to add even more strength and better resist flange failure.  Price isn’t too high for a hub of such quality. Drilling options are plentiful. The previous complaint I had of this hub was that it lacked preload adjustment has been addressed with the new hub having a threaded axle for preload adjustment.  Getting the preload just right does take a bit of practice and a good feel for the hub. I guess the only remaining complaint would be that it’s only available in 3 colors. Geez, that really isn’t much of a complaint, so let me try again. How about this, there still isn’t yet a matching sub 200 gram rear option. A front hub in this weight range really deserves a matching lightweight rear. Customer service from Alchemy has been absolutely top notch.

Ron’s perspective: I still really like this hub. It’s an excellent example of a light front hub that isn’t delving into “crazy light” territory. Very good durability and stiffness. The 6900 bearings are a perfect choice… high capacity and low resistance. I thought the axle change would negatively affect stiffness, but still seems very good. I guess having bearings right near the dropouts and the wide flange offset are more important factors relating to stiffness. Adjustment is by a threaded axle cap with threadlock so it takes a little trial and error to get it perfect. I have this hub on my personal wheels and often marvel at how long the wheel will rock back and forth if it gets bumped.
———————————————-

Chris King R45

FWB Opinion: Chris King has long been considered one of the best hubs amongst mountain bikers. Their road hub does not fall short of this reputation either. At 103 grams it’s one of the heaviest front hubs in the review, but the weight is reflected in the quality. However I’d still prefer they made it lighter.  The made in house angular contact, proprietary bearings have one of the highest load capacities of all tested hubs, they also carry a 5-year warranty. The 17mm axle is the largest of anything in the test. The R45 has the 2nd narrowest flange placement in the test just behind the Soul-Kozak Aero front hub.  King has approved these hubs for radial lacing, which is a departure from their other hubs and they make them in drillings down to 20h. The price is quite reasonable for a Chris King product in my opinion. Color choices are more than plentiful, I can’t think of anyone that offers more. The preload on the hub is probably the best of all hubs  and works stellar as one would expect from such an iconic company, skewers can be clamped at tight as desired without creating any additional drag on the bearings. Besides the weight the thing that bothers me most about these hubs is that they don’t match as well with the rears as I wish.  The rear has a nice mid size flange with cutouts giving it a bit of a retro look.  The front uses a lower flange with no cutouts and a bit more of modern styling.

Ron’s perspective: This a good solid hub… as you would expect from Chris King. One of the real standout features is the finish and overall visual appeal. This is a very pretty and finely crafted hub. The external collar makes precise adjustments easy. It’s overbuilt if you are weight conscious, and the large axle diameter and angular contact bearings tend to cause a little more drag. They are now available with a ceramic bearing option.
———————————————

DT180

FWB Opinion:  This is one of the hubs in this review that I just don’t quite get.  The 180 has a carbon barrel in place of the alloy.  That and the bearings are the only weight savings for this hub vs the 240 front hub. So for more than double the price of the 240 hub you get a 8 gram weight savings and ceramic bearings. But you also can’t get it in black.

Ron’s perspective: I guess this is a good hub for those who want the best and most expensive DT hub. If you like the DT180 rear, then this is the front hub that matches it.
———————————————

DT 240

FWB Opinion: I’m not sure what to say about the DT hub. It’s one of those hubs that isn’t many things, those things being both good and bad. The one thing it is though is a bolt-it and forget-it hub. The DT hub falls into the middle of just about every category, which makes it a nice hub for a wide range of people, and is where it owes a lot of it’s OE success to.  While it seems I’m having a hard time thinking of good things to say about these I’m also finding it hard to say anything bad. So let’s call it a nicely balanced hub, nothing special in any direction but also without any serious negatives in any direction. Customer service has been pretty good with DT over the last couple years.

Ron’s perspective: I don’t think I’ve used one of these since the last review. It’s a common hub that does the job. Many people have a lot of miles on these with no issues.
———————————————-

Extralite SX

FWB Opinion: Made in Italy the SX front is one of the lightest front hubs in the review at 49 grams.  But with all things this comes as a tradeoff.  To get the weight down a mid sized bearing and axle are used which does reduce the durability and stiffness of the hub a bit.  The SX has a simple external preload adjustment, but that is also the source of some of its problems.  The SX definitely requires more frequent adjustment than the more robust hubs we’re looking at.  It is really important that the adjuster be run on the left side of the bike so that it does not loosen during use, but when run on the left side, the laser etched logo on the hub shell is facing the wrong way.  The other unfortunate thing about the SX front is max tension is restricted to 70 kgf.  On the upside serviceability of the hub is very easy and customer service from Extralite is quite stellar.  In my opinion this hub is meant more for special use and not as a daily rider as I had mentioned in the original review as the weight savings definitely comes with a tradeoff.

Ron’s perspective: IMO it crosses the line into the light weight territory where compromises are made. But then, this is intended to be mated to the very light SLX rear hub, so that makes sense.
———————————————-

Extralite SL2

FWB Opinion: Since the SX definitely approaches a special use hub, Extralite reintroduced the original SL with some new upgrades and called it the SL2.  At only a 13 gram weight increase this hub makes much more sense to me as a daily rider.  Full size 6803 bearings with a 17mm axle.  Self aligning flanges.  Larger more robust micro tuner that doesn’t have the same tendency to back off as the SX.  The bracing angle is reduced slightly as compared to the SX but still ample.  Like the SX, serviceability is very easy.  My opinion is that this is about as light of a daily rider hub with easy maintenance as you can get.

Ron’s perspective: Probably worth the 13g weight increase over the SX for most people. Compared to the Alchemy Elf, I like the adjustment on the SL2, but prefer the bearing choice, smaller diameter, and the bearing and flange placement of the ELF.
———————————————-

Soul-Kozak Aero Front

FWB Opinion:  This is the only aero specific hub in the review so maybe it’s not a totally fair comparison.  However the hub is robust and stiff enough that it can be used as a daily rider depending on the rider and the component selection.  The flange placement is narrow which reduces the lateral stiffness of the front wheel, however that’s really the point, it moves the spokes inward and improves the airflow of the front wheel.  Being an aero hub it really wants to be paired with deeper more aero rims, which are in many cases stiffer than lower profile rims.  The combination of a deeper rim and the aero hub makes a wheel that has enough lateral stiffness for most riders in most situations.

Ron’s perspective: Not much to add. I’m sure this hub works fine, but I’m not buying the line that a narrow spacing is more aero. The large diameter axle means more bearing seal drag and a rather fat hub body. The part about deep rims not needing or wanting a wide flange spacing is certainly true though, making this a viable choice for deep carbon rims.
———————————————

Tune Mig45

FWB Opinion: The Mig45 is the lightest hub in the review.  The Mig45 balances performance characteristics quite well.  For this year Tune has increased the axle diameter from 15mm to 17mm increasing lateral stiffness.  It also has fairly wide flange spacing using straight pull spokes.  Overall the hub builds into a lightweight, stiff, smooth rolling wheel. The straight pull spokes should be less prone to breaking than a j-bend, but at the same time can be more of a hassle to deal with if they do break. Finding the proper straight pull spoke at your LBS may not be the easiest option. The main drawback to this hub is serviceability.  Replacing a spoke requires removal of the end caps and axle which is best done with special tools although in a pinch can be done without. I think this is certainly one of the best looking hubs available with its aluminum shell and carbon reinforced ends. There is no preload adjuster other than micro shims but it doesn’t seem to suffer much from tightening of the skewers.  It’s unusual in that the hub is the lightest in the review but doesn’t suffer from some of the durability issues of other light hubs.

Ron’s perspective: This is a good hub for an exotic build. It is visually striking with carbon reinforcements on the shell. The bearings have an excellent load rating for such a light hub.

Tune Mig70

FWB Opinion: The Mig70 is Tunes mainstay front hub and for this year gets larger bearings, larger axle (17mm in place of the previous 15mm) and the adjustment uses micro-shims instead of a threaded cap. It is one of my favorite front hubs due to its balance of characteristics. Good weight, good price, good bearing size, good bearings, good flange spacing, good drilling selection, good color choice, and good axle size. The preload is basic but is accomplished through the use of micro shims.. Self aligning flanges are a nice addition to its already well balanced design. This hub fits right into the middle weight range with the Alchemy, however where it saves weight is that it’s matched rear is significantly lighter than others in its class. Very rarely have there been reported problems with these hubs and when there are typically it’s related to improper lacing. Radial lacing is recommended only on lower drillings. This is one of my go to recommendations for someone that wants a do it all hub but with an eye on weight and performance.

Ron’s perspective: This is a good hub at a decent weight and a fair price. The larger bearings give it a higher load capacity than the previous model, and better stiffness. I would have liked to see a little weight loss to put it more on par with the light Mag170.

White Industries H2

FWB Opinion: At almost 100 grams it’s in the realm of standard weight hubs such as the King R45. It has a very high load capacity on its’ bearings, a good axle size and a good flange spacing. It is certainly a durable hub and can handle all sorts of different lacing options including heads in radial. The price makes this an appealing yet durable budget hub. While I’m not a big fan of the set screw preload adjuster, it is functional and resists compression from the skewer in all but extreme cases. Drilling options are plenty, but color options are limited. The hub seems to weigh more than it needs to, but I suppose that’s partly responsible for its durability.  Its biggest appeal to me is the price and more so it’s appearance.  The H2 is one of the prettiest hubs in the review and as a bonus it works well with weight being its only real shortcoming.
Side note on the weight:  White Industries used to make the H1 front hub which weighed 75g. When they came out with the H2 we asked why they made it so much heavier. Their reply was that the H1 bearings were only lasting on average 9 to 10k miles and that was unacceptable. When they make a product they want it to last for many, many years. So for them to make a hub that needs bearing every couple years was not something they were interested in, that philosophy applies to everything they make.

Ron’s perspective: I like this hub. The bearings are a good size, it’s pretty, and it spins very smooth. I kind of like the collar with set screw… it makes it easy to take up the clearance without the chance of preloading. They could surely drop a little weight but compared to the H3 rear it makes sense.

REAR HUBS

Alchemy ORC

FWB Opinion: The Orc is one of the most recommended hubs by independent wheel builders. It has one of the highest overall static load capacities of any hub in the test partly because of its 5th bearing. The 5th bearing, which is fitted over the outside of the free hub body between the splines and the pawls, press fits into the hub shell and helps keep the body concentric under heavy load. This 5th bearing is also unfortunately the one that is most commonly worn and hardest to replace in the Orc.  The Orc also features a sleeved axle. The sleeve increases the axles’ diameter from 17mm to 20mm at the point where a freehub body could cantilever a little under hard acceleration. The Orc also has the widest drive side flange placements which is partially enabled in the Campag version by pushing the actual width from 130 out to 131.6mm. this however brings an inability to change wheels without adjusting gears. The hub will undoubtedly build one of the stiffest rear wheels possible, but this does also come at a weight penalty over some.  Not that 222 grams is too heavy for a rear hub, but it certainly isn’t too light. This hub has been built with a large, strong rider in mind and is likely overbuilt for some riders. Being a small rider I look forward to seeing what they do with a lighter version. Future compatibility with S11 and the current Orc may be an issue as they’ve not yet decided if they will offer a new S11 body for the current Orc.  Mentioning freehub bodies there have been some reports of failing Campag bodies in recent months.  Customer service with Alchemy is absolutely top notch, parts are readily available but in order to overhaul the hub correctly, special tools are needed. Alchemy has free loaner versions ready to ship should anyone need them, but they will require a deposit. Personally I love an excuse to buy new tools so this just doesn’t bother me.

Ron’s perspective: I’m still very fond of the Orc, and it is a hub I have a lot of experience with. It has proven to be a solid hub with good attention to detail and close tolerances. One if it’s best features is that it squeezes out every last tenth of a mm of driveside offset in both Campy and S versions. As described earlier this allows optimization of both the lateral stiffness and tension ratio. The bearing arrangement is pretty standard except for the addition of a large diameter bearing at the hub/freehub interface. This effectively takes chain loads off the axle at this point and puts them into the hub instead. It also stiffens the whole structure. The axle also has an external reinforcing sleeve at the inner hubshell bearing to further improve stiffness. Visually it’s pretty utilitarian, which will appeal to some and not others. Because of the bearing layout, servicing is a bit more involved than with some other hubs, but Alchemy provides a comprehensive set of tools (to buy or loan) and a series of videos that clearly explain the process. A few negatives: Compared to the front hub it is pretty heavy. The threaded cap with threadlock means that it takes a little back and forth to set the play/preload perfectly. The freehub seems to get chewed up fairly easily; even more than most other aluminum ones. The outer freehub bearing has a small load capacity compared to the others in the hub, and since it is on the outside of the hub and can also be subjected to lateral loads, it doesn’t last as long as the others.
———————————————

Chris King R45

FWB Opinion: Chris King has a reputation for making great hubs and it’s well deserved.  This hub is almost the same as when it was released, the only change that I’m aware of is that the ring drive which was titanium in the original has been changed to steel, making for a more reliable hub that is 10 grams heavier than the original.  Plenty of large bearings with more than enough load capacity. Seals have lower drag and make the hubs feel smoother in your hands. A really stellar preload adjustment resists clamping forces well and makes adjustment a snap.  Also the needle/roller bearing that is present at the freehub body in the classic has become a cartridge in the R45. While not the lightest hub, it is light for a Chris King hub. It’s available in 10 colors including some that are really unique such as root beer. Parts are easily available and it is one of the easiest hubs to service. The tool kit for the classic unfortunately does not work with the R45. This hub is significantly quieter than the classic version thanks to its lower number of engagement points. The reduced number of engagements means that it does have more degrees of free movement before the pedals engage compared to the almost instant engagement on the classic. Not the widest range of spoke drillings, but an adequate number down to 24h. A significantly rightward placed DS flange with a good diameter, large axle and bearings should produce the ability to build a laterally stiff wheel and one that resists windup and cantilevering of the freehub body well. At 55% tension left to right this is about as far as we’d consider adequate, but certainly not across the line of reasonable. I love the cutout in the mid sized nds flange giving it a bit of an old school look and its overall function.  King has unfortunately been quiet about a Shimano 11 body for the future.

Ron’s perspective: It’s proven to be a very good hub. Reliable and strong with high capacity bearings all around and a decent weight. Unlike the MTB hubs it is fairly quiet when coasting. Recently available with a Campy freehub. The flange placement pays attention to maximising the DS offset in both models and the NDS flange spacing is about right. I’m not thrilled with the large diameter NDS flange, but it is a very attractive looking hub with an excellent finish. It is also available in huge variety of colors. The threaded adjustment collar is a nice feature.
———————————————-

DT 180

FWB Opinion: Like the front 180 this hub is also one that I don’t fully grasp.  Sure it’s lighter than some in the review, and comes stock with ceramic bearings, but to me the price is just out of line.   Compared to the 240 most of the weight savings in this hub is due to a reduction in the size of the bearings which comes with a reduction in its durability.  This drop in durability is also reduced through the use of ceramics which tend to wear at a faster rate than stainless.  The hub does use the tried and true star ratchet giving it the typical DT reliability in the drive mechanism and I have to admit the smaller bearings spin with some of the least drag of any hub in the review.  However the hub will also build the least laterally stiff wheel of any hub in the review.   For less money I think a better choice is buy a DT240 and install ceramic bearings.  You won’t get something quite as light as the 180, but you’ll get something better.  If you’re after the 180 for weight savings alone the Tune 170 gives you a much better hub for half the price.

Ron’s perspective: I don’t have much personal experience with this hub, but the small bearing sizes…especially in the freehub… do not give me confidence in its durability. And then there is the price, for a hub that is not that light. The flange spacing makes for a wheel with poor stiffness. Strictly for DT fans.
———————————————-

DT 240

FWB Opinion: There have been no real changes to this hub in years which is understandable with its success in the market.  Like the front hub the DT focuses on balancing traits, and does it well.  The DT is competitively priced falling right in the middle and has a very middle of the road static load capacity. It has the smallest DS bracing angle of all the hubs tested, including other interchangeable bodied hubs but on the other hand this provides a decent tension difference of 49%.  It also means that switching from Campag to Shimano and back is the simplest of all the hubs.   The DT uses a star ratchet drive instead of a standard pawl system, and the ratchet system has a fantastic track record for reliability and function. The hub is very easy to overhaul and needs special tools only to remove the splined half of the ratchet system and inner hubshell bearing in the body.  Perhaps the biggest draw to this hub is the way it’s become completely widespread in the industry. This is good for anyone who needs service or parts. You can walk into your local shop and there’s a good chance they’ll have whatever parts and knowledge are needed to maintain it. Customer service with DT has been very good over the last couple years.   For 2013 a Shimano 11 body will be available using 131mm axle width. The flange spacing is not changing on the 2013 hubs, they have just added 1mm to the non drive side end of the axle.  I’d like to see the 36T ratchet stock in these hubs saving 10 grams and giving quicker engagement.

Ron’s perspective: Definitely a decent reliable hub and at a good weight as well. The bearings are large enough and they rarely need overhauling. Lubing the freehub mechanism is a very easy job. The biggest negative is the less than optimum flange offset on both sides. Plus the price has been creeping up. DT sells these pretty cheap for OEM applications, which reduces their value for customs in my opinion. I frankly never recommend these anymore, since I believe there are better options for any application.
———————————————-

Extralite SLX

FWB Opinion: The previous review featured the SX, a combination straight pull/flanged hub.  For this year we selected to drop that and review the SLX a fully flanged version and the SPM a full straight pull version.  The SLX is the definitive weight weenie flanged hub.    In my opinion there is nothing else on the market in this weight range that approaches the use-ability of this hub.  Being so much lighter than the other hubs in the review one would expect this hub to be very limited in use like the matching SX front.  However over the last couple years the rear has turned out to be surprisingly durable.  That’s not to say it’s in the same league as heavier hubs but that it is a viable option for rear hub.  While not my first choice as a daily rider, it is capable of filling that role.  A 17mm axle with good sized bearings and a decent load capacity.  One drawback is the use of a bushing in place of a large shell bearing at the freehub body interface.  The use of a bushing means that more frequent servicing is required to keep the system spinning freely.  Servicing the hub is very simple and quick to do though.  Extralite does recommend only using their own in house Alugrease for servicing.

Ron’s perspective: I agree. Extralite has done well to make a super light rear hub with acceptable durability. It doesn’t even use exotic materials, or have an exotic price. Of course it would add a little weight, but I’d prefer to see a cartridge bearing rather than a bushing at the inner freehub. The Campy version (and surely the new S11) has a very high NDS offset, making it a good candidate for lighter spokes on that side.
———————————————-

Extralite SPX

FWB Opinion:  Basically this hub is the same as the SLX above, but with the use of straight pull spokes in place of standard J-Bend.  The use of straight pull spokes does increase the bracing angle as well as allow the use of increased spoke tension but at the same time does push the tension difference to the extreme.  The weight drops just a couple of grams and the price goes up a bit.   Again this hub has turned out to be a surprise.  Far more reliable than we had expected and approaching the realm of a daily use hub though still not as trouble free as heavier hubs.

Ron’s perspective: A good hub for riders wanting super light weight and straight pull spokes. The flange spacing essentially requires the use of lighter spokes on the NDS… which isn’t necessarily a negative anymore.
———————————————-

Soul-Kozak Magnetic Rear

FWB Opinion: The big difference is the move from a 3 pawl drive system to a magnetic mechanical diode system that Soul Kozak first used on theirmtb hub.  The system is very similar to DT Swiss’ star ratchet but with a few differences. The drive ring’s teeth are machined vertically into the side of the freehub body and are one piece not separate. The other half of the drive ring is a machined steel piece that is floating in the hub shell. The floating drive ring and teeth machined into the side of the freehub body are forced together by opposing magnetic forces. The freehub body is steel not aluminum but the hub is still only 212g. So it is slightly lighter weight than the DT Swiss 240 hub which uses an alloy freehub body and smaller bearings and axle. Also the Soul Kozak uses very large 6903 size bearings. There are a few hubs that are using the 6903 size but usually only one or two. The Shimano hub uses a total of four 6903 bearings, two non-drive side and two in the freehub body. The Campagnolo version uses two 6903 bearings on the non-drive side and and two 6803 in the freehub body to accommodate the smaller diameter freehub body. Since steel is stronger than aluminum they were able to machine the walls of the freehub body thinner and squeeze the large outside diameter of the 6903 bearing into the freehub body.  The downside to this is that a standard lockring does not fit so the hub includes its own proprietary alloy lockring.  At right around $300 this has to be one of the best value hubs in the review, it is also the loudest.

Ron’s perspective: No experience with this hub, but the specs are impressive. I thought the 6903 freehub bearings were a misprint, but it’s true. Steel freehub body also, and yet a good weight. No longer a weight weenie hub, but looks promising for someone in the market for an innovative hub with a good price and weight.
———————————————-

Tune Mag150

FWB Opinion: Tunes current flagship hub, 153grams makes it lighter than everything except the Extralite. For a hub at this weight it has plenty of large bearings and a high static capacity thanks to larger axle and bearings than previous models.  Tune also removed the proprietary XoT bearing from the hub and replaced it with two individual 6903/6803 bearings.  Overall the hub works really well, but the price and the serviceability hold it back a bit in my opinion.  Spoke replacement of NDS spokes requires removal of the axle.  Also new for 2012 is a larger shell, larger freehub body, and larger drive ring.  These changes have removed the tendency that previous models had to make a creaking sound under load.  Overall a very nice hub, but hard to justify the decrease in serviceability and increase in price when compared to the 17 gram heavier 170.

Ron’s perspective: An exotic light hub with good sized bearings, a carbon axle and shell reinforcements, and a Ti drive ring. Maybe not so practical, but still a viable choice for “exotic” wheelsets.
———————————————-

Tune Mag170

FWB Opinion: The Mag170 has had a major overhaul for 2012 and it’s quickly becoming one of my favorite weight oriented hubs.  The hub shell got larger as did the freehub body and titanium drive ring.  This addressed the previous versions tendency to make noise.  The axle went from 15mm to 17mm as the bearings also got larger which improved the stiffness.  The XoT bearing was removed in favor of a pair of traditional bearings. Which while it does reduce its ability to resist cantilevering it also makes for a quieter, easier to service hub. The adjustment now uses micro shims rather than a threaded cap.  The left flange has been moved inward a little to address tension balancing issues as well. The hub is light, works well, comes in a variety of colors and is priced well.  Overall a hard hub to beat for a daily rider looking for something lighter or more unique than the mainstays.

Ron’s perspective: The design looks very good. They’ve taken care of some issues with the Mag180 and dropped the weight at the same time. If it proves reliable, this is an excellent choice for a light hub that is also reasonably priced. The price, weight, and features put this hub in the sweet spot for a lot of riders.
———————————————-

White Industries H3

FWB Opinion: The H3 has not been changed in several years with the exception of a bearing adjustment moving to a custom double row bearing in the freehub.  Made in the U.S. the H3 has one of the highest static capacities of the test, but should be expected from a hub in this weight class. At 264grams for the Campag version it’s the heaviest hub we reviewed. It has large bearings that spin smoothly, and an easy to use preload adjustment, though not my favorite design. It also has a nice outward position of the left bearing. At $265 it is a very reasonably priced rear hub. In some cases it seems almost over built, such as having 3 or 4 bearings in the freehub body. One thing that makes it heavier is also the thing I like most about it, that is that it is the only rear hub in the review to have a ti freehub body. This is great for riders running Shimano who are tired of the alloy bodies being grooved by cogs. I also love the look of this hub in silver, this is one of the best looking silver hubs I’ve ever seen, yet at the same time, the black version just doesn’t look as good to me. White industries is easy to get a hold of and customer service from them has been good. The H3 is the only hub in the test that uses steel for the rear axle making it very good for very large riders.

Ron’s perspective: This is really a fine US made hub for riders who aren’t so focused on low weight. It’s strong, has a large bearing capacity, it looks nice, has a Ti freehub, and the price is good. The design is simple too, and it’s easy to service. One bonus of the collar-with-set-screw method of adjustment, is that it is near impossible to make the preload too high. I think it’s the only hub in this review that has a steel axle. It’s easy to build solid wheelsets with the H3 that are in the 1350-1500g range, which makes them lighter than comparable factory wheels that are much more expensive.
———————————————-

Saris Powertap G3

FWB Opinion: The G3 was a major step forward for this hub. The weight dropped substantially compared to the previous SL+ hub, 337g G3 vs 430g SL+. With the drop in weight the flange width has also increased, this was a good thing because Powertap wheels were known for being flexy. The increase in flange width did make the wheel stiffer but it actually did nothing for tension balance with both the old and new hubs having a 47% tension balance. Because of the large diameter flanges and semi narrow drive side flange spacing these hubs greatly benefit from lacing the drive side 1x with the elbows on the outside of the flange. When doing this the bracing angle goes up almost 2 degrees, which is great for lateral stiffness.

Ron’s perspective: The large weight reduction is a big plus for the G3. Now it is arguably the lightest way to add a powermeter to your bike. The smaller hubshell makes it more visually appealing. Another bonus is the easily removable transmitter electronics. I like that they increased the DS spacing, but IMO they went a little too far on the NDS… unless you use lighter spokes on that side. At any rate the spacing is better than it was on the old hub. The NDS axle cap was also changed and should result in greater longevity for that bearing, though it is still a small 6802. Since Saris recommends sending the hub to them for bearing replacement, I’d much prefer a more durable 6902 in that spot.
———————————————-
We realize that this review was quite long, and unfortunately it only touches on a lot of the subjects.  There is much, much more that goes into component selection and design for a custom wheel.  However in the interest of keeping this review to a moderate length we decided to leave out some information.  In the coming months we hope to write more on the subject including reviews on rims as well as spokes and lacing patterns but for now we do hope that you found this an interesting read and have a better idea of what hubs may or may not be ideal for you.

The post 2012 Hub Review: Information overload? appeared first on Fair Wheel Bikes.

I also think it’s important to point out that while I am a fan of Di2,  I have not liked 7900 and have been a harsh critic of it.  Honestly, I was not expecting to like the new 9000 group, but I have to admit after riding it I am thoroughly impressed.

Dura Ace 9000

This is the new mechanical Dura Ace.  The first thing I noticed was that Shimano skipped ’8000′ entirely, and there are some guesses as to why but in the interest of keeping things short we’ll skip it for now.  The next thing of course is the price: MSRP is $2699, a 5% increase from 7900.  It’s completely disproportionate from the performance increase, which is honestly quite enormous.  The group shaves 77 grams overall from 7900, but the focus for this group wasn’t on shaving weight, it was on increasing performance.  There has been talk on the net about the new group, much of which focused on the 11 speed aspect and the look of the new crank.  In reality these two things are pretty much just incidentals.  The shifters are the primary focus, although every piece in the group has been re-worked and changed with some definite influence from the Dyna-sys MTB series.

Shifters

Dura Ace 9000 Shifter

Since the shifters were the primary focus it seems as good a place as any to start.  The new shifter gets ergonomic changes such as decreasing the overall volume of the hood almost back to 7800 dimensions.  Overall the shape is very close to the Di2 hood.  The rubber hood itself gets a dual density compound.  The weight drops 14 grams from 7900.  The setup gets easier with the mounting bolt and reach adjustment  moved to more accessible positions. The cable guide system is redesigned so the cables just slip into place without any struggle.   The lever blade gets more outward lean for its starting position.  The release is a 30% shorter stroke.  But the big change is something Shimano is calling Vivid Index.  This is basically a two part system and the most noticeable improvement to the lever.  The first aspect of Vivid Index is a decreasing resistance as you shift up the cogs.  Through some mechanical magic and by using a dynamic pull ratio Shimano has reduced the effort it takes to shift by a claimed 47%.  It takes roughly half the pressure to shift as previous 7900 versions, but it goes further than that as well.  Normally as you shift to larger rear cogs the resistance in the mechanism increases with each shift, so shifting from say a 12 to 13 tooth is noticeably easier than shifting from 23 to 25t.   However with the decreasing resistance the shifting on 9000 gets easier the further you move up the cassette.  So it starts with less effort than previous versions and with each shift the effort involved to move it to the next cog is less still.  Ok so maybe people are thinking, “big deal, it’s not like it was all that difficult to shift 7900“. And maybe it wasn’t, but the change is so drastic you can’t help but notice it.  The shifting effort of 9000 is so light it really can be compared to Di2.   The next thing I think some will say: “if it’s too soft it lacks that tactile racing feel”.  This leads us to the second aspect of Vivid Index, the detents.  The detents (clicks as some people like to call them.) are more defined and stronger than previous versions.  So while it takes less effort to shift, it gives more feedback as to when it hits and locks into a gear.  The combined change is dramatic.  The feeling is very ‘hydraulic’ — the best I can equate it to is a hydraulic brake on a MTB where it takes practically no effort to move the lever but there’s no question as to when it engages.

Rear Derailleur

Dura Ace 9000 Derailleur

Of the entire group the rear derailleur saw perhaps the fewest changes.  Obviously it’s quite changed aesthetically but in terms of performance not much has changed.  The pull ratio has been matched to the new shifter.  The 4mm pinch bolt location is closer to the lower parallelogram linkage to help cover the wider 11 speed range. The pivot bolt is changed and the pinch bolt mounting is cleaned up and moved a bit more out of the way.  The rear derailleur drops 8 grams of weight.

Front Derailleur

Visually the longer lever arm is the most notable

The front derailleur sheds merely one gram of weight, but like so much of the group gains a lot in performance.  The most noticeable difference is the much longer actuation lever arm.  This drops the required shift effort by a claimed 43%.  After riding it, I have no doubts about the honesty of that number.  The lever has a shorter stroke.  The front change is equally as noticeable as the rear and perhaps even more Di2-esque.  The mechanical front now adds in a secondary support screw like the one introduced on Di2 a few years ago.  That makes for a more rigid mount and in turn quicker shifting.  The inner cage also gets a replaceable plastic bushing which seems to serve no purpose other than to deaden noise, particularly when cross chaining.  One thing that will probably escape most product announcements is the inclusion of a cable mode converter.  The short throw of the shifter pulling on the long leverage arm of the derailleur needs to have some adjustability for differences in frames and their braze-on locations.  The mode converter works as a small eccentric which changes the pull ratio of the front derailleur based on its position.  The cable wraps around the converter and goes to either of two small tabs where the cable pinch bolt is located.  Put it in one location for on and rotate it to the other tab for off.  The front shifting is perhaps even far more striking of a change than the rear.  There is no arguing that Shimano has for years dominated in the front shifting arena, but with this new setup they have gone leaps and bounds beyond the previous versions.  The action is so amazingly light and precise that their is no arguing that they’ve taken back some serious ground on gains made by Di2.  The difference in front shifting between the 9000 and Di2 are actually quite minimal.

Brakes

New Dual Pivot Front Brake

The 9000 brake, which is being called Ev-control, also got a massive reworking from the ground up.  Pre-production pictures that have been floating around the net have led some to speculate that the brake is a 3 pivot, which is not the case.  The brake remains a dual pivot design, but the main bolt now keeps a fixed position and is no longer one of the pivots.  The change aligns the pivots to a mirror-image position with each other, which reduces the distance from pivot to the brake pad from previously 39mm down to 22mm.  The shorter span means stiffer arms which translates to a stiffer brake.  Shimano claims it is a 10% stronger brake with more modulation.  All told Shimano is claiming a 20% increase in braking power, but only half of that comes from the actual caliper.  The other half comes from a change in the brake lever as well as a reduction in friction in the entire system through the use of a new cable and routing method.  The brake is backwards-compatible and is confirmed to work with a 7900 lever.  Any friction where the arms meet is reduced through the use of a rolling bushing which decreases resistance more.  We tested the brake with 23mm wide rims and found it works well with the new range of wide rims.  The brake is also available in a direct mount version for aero/TT use which includes a remote quick release for the system.  The only complaint we had with the new brake was a minor one.  The main mounting bolt is a slip fit T-bolt which does not back directly to anything.  So while trying to tighten the mounting nut, the T-bolt has a tendency to rise up out of its housing.  This was solved by filling the empty space with something while installing the brake, in our case we used a plastic tire lever.  Like with it’s front shifting Dura Ace has also been the gold standard for brakes.  It’s the brake that others benchmark for comparison.  My personal opinion is that it worked so well it really didn’t need improving, but I’m certainly not going to complain about it being improved.  The overall feel of the brake is strong and well-modulating as one would expect; it’s hard to say if I noticed an increase in power or modulation but the previous one shined so well in those areas that it would be a hard thing to notice.  For me the thing I noticed the most was the increase in how smoothly it operated.

Cranks

Four Arm Crank For Both Compact and Standard Ring Sizes

The new crank is probably the most visibly noticeable change in the group.  The arm is massive, and while we don’t yet have one that we can do deflection testing with, we expect to see an increase in both stiffness and a jump in stiffness to weight ratio coming from both the increase in stiffness and the drop in weight.  In fact most of the weight savings of the group comes out of the crank and bb, which together shave 52 grams.  Thanks to their continued refinement of super stiff hollow forged chainrings, Shimano could eliminate one of the spider arms and go to a 4 arm arrangement.  The placement of the 4 arms aligns with the power delivery of  the rider’s pedal stroke, with the gap placed at the ‘dead spot’. And the stiffer rings are able to handle the longer spans of unsupported ring.  The 4 arm design does away with different spiders for compact and standard and replaces them with a proprietary bolt circle for all configurations.  Chainring options will be  50/34, 52/36, 52/38, 53/39, 54/42, and 55/42.  I still don’t know whether they’ll have a differing A-B series or if all of each size ring will be the same.  We can hope that there will be only one series, which would give the ability to mix and match combinations.  We suspect that won’t be the case but also suspect that mixing, even though not ideal, will still work just fine.   The spindle remains the same 24mm diameter while the bottom bracket itself gets smaller.  The cup shrinks but will come with a plastic sleeve that increases its outer diameter during installation so that existing Shimano BB tools will work with it.

Cassette

Carbon and Aluminium Spiders Keep Weight Down

The obvious change here is the addition of an 11th cog. Even so, the cassette only gains 3 grams in a given size.  The 5 largest cogs are titanium and the 6 smaller cogs are steel.  The two largest cogs are attached with a traditional aluminum spider.  And the next three cogs are attached to a carbon fiber spider which helps shave some of the weight.  The teeth of the cassette have also visibly changed in their orientation. Many of the teeth are rotated, leaning sideways and rounded.  From above the cassette looks more like a chipper/shredder than a bicycle cassette.  The thickness of each cog remains unchanged, while the distance between them is only very slightly decreased.  Enough so that it appears you can use an 11 speed group with a 10 speed cassette, though I can’t image why you’d want to.

Chain

New Symmetric and pfte Coated Chain

With cog thickness not changing and cog spacing not changing much, the chain didn’t really have to change much, yet it did nevertheless.  The asymmetrical chain of 7900 is no more and we’re back to a symmetrical chain.  I’m told this was possible through a combination of improvements in the cassette, rings, shifters and derailleurs.  The result being that an asymmetrical design just isn’t needed anymore.   The chain has also been pfte coated.  This is said to reduce chain noise, reduce friction and increase chain life.  The chain is expected to last longer than a 7800 chain.  The new chain also includes a new bullet-shaped connecting pin.   There is also a new chain tool which is spaced slightly narrower to hold the thinner links in place, however we suspect that while maybe not ideal, one could use an existing chain tool on the chain.

Cables

Improved Coating Resists Wear and is Sliiiiiiiiiick

Even the cables get a change.  The traditional pfte coating had a tendency to scratch off and ball up inside the housing, causing an increase in system friction.  These cables have a new coating that they say won’t scratch off.  It definitely is slick though, I kept trying to wipe the grease off my fingers after touching the cable, but couldn’t because there wasn’t any grease to wipe off, it just felt like a greased cable.

Overall the entire group is really impressive.  It seems every piece has been reworked with serious increases in performance and some touches to make the group even run with less noise.  Everything about this group just feels better.

So to come back to what I said about having to eat my words.  A couple years ago when electronic shifting started to pick up steam, I made the comment that mechanical groups were basically zombies (living dead).  The 3 manufacturers had all pushed them just about as far as they could go.  The only thing left was to shave a few grams here and there, make them slightly more aero, but that no major improvements could be expected from any of them.  As to that, I have to say I was wrong.   The new group is truly amazing and is leaps and bounds better than 7800. (That’s right, I’m not even comparing it to 7900 because 7800 was to me the pinnacle of the Dura Ace line.) And now I’ve seen that the  9000 group takes it way beyond all that have come before it.

The other words I have to eat are words that I’ve said over and over since the introduction of Di2: “I’ll never have mechanical on my own personal bikes again.”   Again I was wrong.  I won’t give up my Di2, especially not with 9070 coming, but I will certainly want to add a 9000 group to the arsenal.

In the past when building a project and helping someone to choose the right group,  I’ve traditionally said that the differences are small and that all the top shelf groups work really well.  I tell people to choose a group based on how the lever feels in your hands, the weight and the looks of the group.  Now I have to reconsider that as 9000 has a definite performance advantage over the others.

So that’s it, it’s not everything but it’s a pretty good introduction to Dura Ace 9000 and should give you a good idea of how much engineering went into this group and what I think of it.  We did have to wonder though, “why now?”  Why spend the time and resources to so massively overhaul an unfortunately dying breed?  Perhaps that’s just it though, perhaps it’s because it is dying.  While Shimano has no official plans to kill off mechanical, I think the feeling with a lot of people including the engineers at Shimano is that this could perhaps be the last high end mechanical group that Shimano produces.  And if it’s going to be the last why not end on the highest note possible.

Read More: Dura Ace Di2 and Shimano Wheels

The post Shimano 2013, Part 1. Dura Ace 9000 appeared first on Fair Wheel Bikes.