[CR]FB Hi/Lo track hub?

(Example: Production Builders:Peugeot:PY-10)

Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 17:14:22 -0500
From: "Harvey Sachs" <hmsachs@verizon.net>
Subject: [CR]FB Hi/Lo track hub?
To: jvs@sonic.net, Classic Rendezvous <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>


Jay - your comment (below) is intuitively attractive, but I don't think it is well supported. For example, if you think 4x, the spoke length for high flange is essentially identical to that for low flange. Taking all factors into account, Jim Papadopoulos rna out the equations and concluded that the differences in wheel stiffness between 4x and radial are probably too small to perceive - sort of a pump strokes' worth of pressure difference in the tire. So, I'm not inclined to believe that shorter spokes being stiffer is the answer. After all, the loading on a spoke is pure tension. If anything, wouldn't wire gauge=spoke diameter matter more? Personally, my guess is that 3x v. 4x, high-flange v. small flange, etc. are fashion items more than structural optimization.

harvey sachs mcLean va. (with no pretense to being able to do the analysis myself). ++++++++++++++++++++++ Higher flange equals shorter spokes equals stiffer drive side, which is what you want when you're stomping on the pedals.

Jay Sexton Sebastopol, CA

This one puzzles me. ebay item 110209598317 http://ebay.com/<blah>

why would one need a high low Track hub? I always thought the high low hub was designed to compensate for the unequal spoke tensions created by dishing on 5 and 6 speed freewheels. I also was under the impression that a Track hub will have less required dish due to the more symetrical design of the hub.

So, unless I'm totally wrong (wouldn't be the first time) whats the rational behind this hub?

Marty Eison
Frisco, Texas, USA