Re: [CR] Where are the high flange hubs?

(Example: Racing:Beryl Burton)

Date: Sat, 20 Nov 2004 06:15:19 -0800 (PST)
From: Jerome & Elizabeth Moos <jerrymoos@sbcglobal.net>
Subject: Re: [CR] Where are the high flange hubs?
To: Fred Rafael Rednor <fred_rednor@yahoo.com>, classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
In-Reply-To: <20041120140534.9035.qmail@web11908.mail.yahoo.com>


Well, my bum has only about 35 years of riding lightweights, not counting my childhood coaster brake and "English Racer" bikes. But it can definitely tell differences between flange sizes and number of spokes.

Regards,

Jerry Moos Houston, TX

Fred Rafael Rednor <fred_rednor@yahoo.com> wrote: Off-list: Just tell him that 50 years of riding withthe same tuchus and multiple wheel sets has convinced you there's no difference between high and low flange. (At least my tuchus can't tell the difference - but I only have 45 years of riding on it...) Fred


--- Jerome & Elizabeth Moos wrote:


> Well, maybe, but I'd want to see how the tests were
> conducted. Maybe different wheels react similarly to radial
> loading, but actual riding involves lateral loads, which
> might be an entirely different story. As an engineer myself,
> I'm always suspicious of "scientific testing". True,
> sometimes it can explode myths, but testing only gives you
> the answers to the questions you design the test to ask.
> It's all too common to see people design tests to prove what
> they believe, often with total sincerity, and the firm but
> mistaken belief that they are being "scientific". In my
> mind it takes more than a few hours of testing to
> conclusively disprove millions of manyears of collective
> practical experiene, even granting that experience is
> subjective and can be influenced by popoular myth.
>
> Regards,
>
> Jerry Moos
> Houston, TX
>
> HM & SS Sachs wrote:
> Ted Ernst has done an excellent job of capturing the
> conventional wisdom about performance differences between
> high flange and low flange hubs. My good friend Jim
> Papadopoulos actually did measurements on wheels,
> particularly on spoking patterns (radial to 4 cross). In the
> test stand, the differences were so small as to be
> unnoticeable. What continues to amaze me is how much the
> "engineering" of the bikes we love was driven by marketing,
> myth, and tradition. It's not unique in this (think about
> house construction). Here's an example: Schwinn (and others)
> did a lot of real engineering for their manufacturing
> processes, but not nearly as much for the product design
> itself -- unless you count waterpipe welding and grinding.
>
> Again, I'm not criticizing Ted, for whom I have great
> respect, but just pointing out where all of us were, and how
> it seems to differ from some other fields that are better
> capitalized.
>
> harvey sachs
>
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> It's not a matter of better,but a matter of proper
> application of product.
> In general terms, high flange hubs were prettier?(to the
> commodity broker
> importer),and several $ more expensive. A lot of the older
> racing bikes were
> fairly flexible so a stiffer more responsive high flange
> balanced some of
> that out.
> High flanges were also nice for short course tight corner
> racing.
> Remember, there were few racers but
> a lot of new riders who wanted fast , light bikes and a
> racing bike is what
> they got. A good clincher wheel sport touring bike with
> lesser quality
> equipment
> was cheaper and obviously not as good. There were few good
> frame sport
> touring bikes on the market during the '60's. Custom, sure,
> but not
> production
> hand built as the " racing bikes" were.
> It was not a matter of the customer getting smarter as it was
> the shops and
> importers getting to know bikes better and wising up. Maybe
> the europeans
> had a little sales con going on also to get rid of less
> popular items at
> home.
> The small flange hubs were better for rough roads and long
> distance riding.
> As the frame tubing metallurgy improved the stiffer frames
> allowed for more
> small flange hub use and it got to be standard as time went
> along. In my
> opinion
> a large flange hub is still nicer for short course snappy
> riding. But with
> today's
> technology. metallurgy, carbon, aero shaped rims, one can
> beat themselves to
> aches and pains. My feeling on this is only for vintage bike
> use. Today's
> equipment
> is much nicer, but the old stuff is much more fun. Modern
> riders and,
> equipment are
> blended with comfort, weight,and efficiency in mind. During
> the '60's-'70's
> I raced on
> 28h Arc en Ciel rims, high flange hubs in all the So. Cal.
> races and hardly
> ever
> had to touch up the true. Ted Ernst.
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today!
http://my.yahoo.com