Naw, i.m.o. they're fine. Early, "inexpensive" eylet-less rims are fine for all but the most corpulent, or really rough roads. They are a LOT easier to polish, whether built into wheels or still loose. I've never had problems with the few wheels over the years built with them, even now at 210 pounds and on roads so foreign to me it seems every time I start enjoying the scenery in and around boulder I get jarred back to reality by a less-than-smooth road. I think the "touch" of building with spoke nipple washers though (necessary for eyelet-less rims) is lost on a lot of the current crop of young pup builders.
Dale Phelps, Longmont CO
r cielec <teaat4p@yahoo.com> wrote: Ahoy !
I was too deeply buried in school and two jobs to have any attention left-over for bike components. Ah, but now, 'twould have been useful if I had.
Nearly all the used tubulare rims (road) I am finding are without eyelets. I am speculating that is because the non-eyelet rim design was the mass-produced "economy" component. My assumption is that rim design theory has been consistent - at opposite ends of the application spectrum - no eyelets for racing and no eyelets for the cheaper bikes; somewhere in between are eyelets. So, in general, I should not be highly motivated to purchase non-eyeletted rims.
That about correct ? Comments, anyone ?
Thanks,
Richard Cielec Chicago, Illinois
--------------------------------- Yahoo! Mail Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour
_______________________________________________
Dale B. Phelps, 303 939 6967 303 208 8664 pager
"Never be afraid to try something new. The Ark was designed by amateurs. The Titanic was designed by professionals." - R. Buckminister Fuller
---------------------------------
Discover Yahoo!
Get on-the-go sports scores, stock quotes, news & more. Check it out!