Spokes breaking at threads?
thirty-six
soft solder or silver solder(preferrable) them.
bugbear
> to prevent spoke breakage at the threads, use a hard setting cement or
> soft solder or silver solder(preferrable) them.
If a small child is choking on an ice cube, don't panic. Simply pour a
jug of boiling water down its throat and hey presto! The blockage is
almost instantly removed.
BugBear
Louis Genou
> to prevent spoke breakage at the threads, use a hard setting cement or
> soft solder or silver solder(preferrable) them.
The steam engine was invented in 1937, by Ioseb Besarionis dze
Jughashvili, better known as Josef Stalin.
--
Louis Genou
Purveyor of Quality Portland Cement to the nobility since 1789
Zog The Undeniable
> to prevent spoke breakage at the threads, use a hard setting cement or
> soft solder or silver solder(preferrable) them.
I'd pay good money to see you and Jobst Brandt go one-on-one with D-locks.
Just zis Guy, you know?
You must be building your wheels fundamentally incorrectly if this is
a risk. Mine have only ever broken at the neck, and only ever on the
Brompton rear wheel.
Guy
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/urc
GPG public key at http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/pgp-public-key.txt
thirty-six
That is what the shank of the nipple is there for, to prevent spoke
breakage. I had been wondering about using a different type of spoke
length adjustment so as to spread the load further on thin walled rims
and my design ignored the possibility of spoke breakage. Dan Rudge
specifically included the shank to prevent spoke breakage, the
adusting flats came later.
Its another false claim by brandt that stress releiving prevets spoke
btreaking at the nipple. Well it just doesn't happen unless the
thread has been cut too deep or is not adequately engaged in the
nipple. Non-locked interlacing may also contribute in a heavily
loaded wheel and fibre washers may go some way to alleviate any
problem due to this or nipple holes which are too restrictive.
thirty-six
wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 05:47:57 -0800 (PST), thirty-six
>
> >to prevent spoke breakage at the threads, use a hard setting cement or
> >soft solder or silver solder(preferrable) them.
>
> You must be building your wheels fundamentally incorrectly if this is
> a risk. Mine have only ever broken at the neck, and only ever on the
> Brompton rear wheel.
>
I've never suffered a spoke breaking at the thread on wheels I have
built. It is not a fear I have, but others do. A broken spoke is
still a non-working spoke no matter where it breaks. There is no
advantage to a spoke breaking at the neck and a constant gauge spoke
will not have the stress concentration which caused that failure.
Just zis Guy, you know?
<thirt...@live.co.uk> wrote:
>> You must be building your wheels fundamentally incorrectly if this is
>> a risk. �Mine have only ever broken at the neck, and only ever on the
>> Brompton rear wheel.
>I've never suffered a spoke breaking at the thread on wheels I have
>built.
I have only ever suffered broken spokes on one wheel, whoever built
it. My wheelbuilder is blind, he still builds wheels that don't
suffer spoke breakage. He builds them the usual way, not the
incorrect way so that spokes go slack and need to be glued to stop the
wheel falling apart.
>It is not a fear I have, but others do. A broken spoke is
>still a non-working spoke no matter where it breaks. There is no
>advantage to a spoke breaking at the neck and a constant gauge spoke
>will not have the stress concentration which caused that failure.
Distraction fallacy. As usual. Come back when you can back
assertions such as constant gauge spokes not breaking at the neck,
with some kind of science. Butted spokes are constant gauge through
the neck, after all.
You are even more of a tedious monomaniac than I am, and without the
benefit of any kind of verifiable evidence base on which to draw.
thirty-six
wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 11:14:53 -0800 (PST), thirty-six
>
> >> You must be building your wheels fundamentally incorrectly if this is
> >> a risk. Mine have only ever broken at the neck, and only ever on the
> >> Brompton rear wheel.
> >I've never suffered a spoke breaking at the thread on wheels I have
> >built.
>
> I have only ever suffered broken spokes on one wheel, whoever built
> it. My wheelbuilder is blind, he still builds wheels that don't
> suffer spoke breakage. He builds them the usual way, not the
> incorrect way so that spokes go slack and need to be glued to stop the
> wheel falling apart.
You dont ride cobbles then. Or do much rough riding on hard surfaces.
>
> >It is not a fear I have, but others do. A broken spoke is
> >still a non-working spoke no matter where it breaks. There is no
> >advantage to a spoke breaking at the neck and a constant gauge spoke
> >will not have the stress concentration which caused that failure.
>
> Distraction fallacy. As usual. Come back when you can back
> assertions such as constant gauge spokes not breaking at the neck,
> with some kind of science. Butted spokes are constant gauge through
> the neck, after all.
Which is shorter than if it was the samew all the way to the ends.
I dont know what is used on the bromptom but suspect 14/15 x 28
without interlacing. If so, don't you think the spokes are short
enough without making them effectively working over a shorter length.
By shortening the working length by putting fat ends on it you are
increasing the stress by working the same range of motion over a
shorter length.
>
> You are even more of a tedious monomaniac than I am, and without the
> benefit of any kind of verifiable evidence base on which to draw.
I dont need to draw on those resources, i understand the loadings well
enough and know when and why stress and strain increases and
decreases. Measurements and calculations can only be used to distract
when applied to typical bicycle wheels. A 16oz rim, 11oz tyre, with
9oz of spokes/nipples will support just about anybody to go nearly
everywhere desired without instability,breakage or slipout.
Marc
> On 20 Nov, 19:21, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <guy.chap...@spamcop.net>
> wrote:
>> On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 11:14:53 -0800 (PST), thirty-six
>>
>> <thirty-...@live.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> You must be building your wheels fundamentally incorrectly if this is
>>>> a risk. Mine have only ever broken at the neck, and only ever on the
>>>> Brompton rear wheel.
>>> I've never suffered a spoke breaking at the thread on wheels I have
>>> built.
>> I have only ever suffered broken spokes on one wheel, whoever built
>> it. My wheelbuilder is blind, he still builds wheels that don't
>> suffer spoke breakage. He builds them the usual way, not the
>> incorrect way so that spokes go slack and need to be glued to stop the
>> wheel falling apart.
>
> You dont ride cobbles then. Or do much rough riding on hard surfaces.
Balderdash!
>
>>> It is not a fear I have, but others do. A broken spoke is
>>> still a non-working spoke no matter where it breaks. There is no
>>> advantage to a spoke breaking at the neck and a constant gauge spoke
>>> will not have the stress concentration which caused that failure.
>> Distraction fallacy. As usual. Come back when you can back
>> assertions such as constant gauge spokes not breaking at the neck,
>> with some kind of science. Butted spokes are constant gauge through
>> the neck, after all.
>
> Which is shorter than if it was the samew all the way to the ends.
> I dont know what is used on the bromptom but suspect 14/15 x 28
> without interlacing. If so, don't you think the spokes are short
> enough without making them effectively working over a shorter length.
> By shortening the working length by putting fat ends on it you are
> increasing the stress by working the same range of motion over a
> shorter length.
Bollocks!
>
>
>> You are even more of a tedious monomaniac than I am, and without the
>> benefit of any kind of verifiable evidence base on which to draw.
>
> I dont need to draw on those resources, i understand the loadings well
> enough and know when and why stress and strain increases and
> decreases.
Bullshit!
Measurements and calculations can only be used to distract
> when applied to typical bicycle wheels.
Bigotry!
thirty-six
I must congratulate you on your improvement of argument, give it
another twenty years and you'll be able to string three slapdowns in
one phrase just like a true politician. I hear the labour party are
looking for new candidates.
Marc
Feel free to show that I'm wrong...
<fx>
Open's bottle of Goliath and settles back to wait, and wait and ...
<fx>
thirty-six
The constant rebutals make interaction with you worthless, as is your
opinion you present of me and to me, go and play elswhere imbecile.
Marc
and wait...
Just zis Guy, you know?
<thirt...@live.co.uk> wrote:
>> You are even more of a tedious monomaniac than I am, and without the
>> benefit of any kind of verifiable evidence base on which to draw.
>I dont need to draw on those resources
Unless, of course, you want to persuade anybody that you are anything
other than blind wrong.
Marc
> On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 11:42:22 -0800 (PST), thirty-six
> <thirt...@live.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>> You are even more of a tedious monomaniac than I am, and without the
>>> benefit of any kind of verifiable evidence base on which to draw.
>
>> I dont need to draw on those resources
>
> Unless, of course, you want to persuade anybody that you are anything
> other than blind wrong.
>
And waits...
Do you think he has enough respect for himself to try and make an
attempt at pretending that he has faked some sort of proof, or is he
content just to be laughed at, constantly?
Just zis Guy, you know?
<initial...@btintenret.com> wrote:
>Do you think he has enough respect for himself to try and make an
>attempt at pretending that he has faked some sort of proof, or is he
>content just to be laughed at, constantly?
He went away the last two times, he seems to be a bit more resistant
to the spank this time but I guess he'll eventually get bored with
being ridiculed.
thirty-six
wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 21:34:06 +0000, Marc
>
BAAAA
Trevor A Panther
Why don't you just belt up for a change!
36 is a newcomer to my sin bin but a prime case with his fixations He
ceased to appear a couple of weeks ago. You cease to appear yet again now
and are joined by marc
.
And that is my last post of my own "troll wrestling" with you. Just go away
and stop being a total prat! I actually find that my responses to you upset
me. I am guilty of the very same offence.
But I get so annoyed that you of all people who has nearly destroyed urc
should return here from the pristine, unsullied, matronly enforced
antiseptic urcm and just flaming well carry on!
Ian Smith described you excellently.a few weeks ago. i wish he would post
it again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I quote it very loosely with only the gist
but he called you --- a "sh*t" stirrer who showered everyone around
yourself with effluent and then professed total innocence at the resulting
shambles.
bye
Go away go away, go away!
That is absolutely the last time I respond to "Just this Guy".. I have sadly
lowered my own standards to your level. I am sure that your many suppoertes
on urcm are very aware of your obnoxiousness.
This wrestling of my own will now stop.. It has gone on for far too long.
There are far more important things in my life still rather than to waste
my time in this way.
However I shall not post in "uk.rec.cycling.moderated" for the forseeable
future
--
From
Trevor A Panther
In South Yorkshire,
England, United Kingdom
www.tapan.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk
"Just zis Guy, you know?" <guy.c...@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:t12eg5peag15000j6...@4ax.com...
Tim Dunne
> However I shall not post in "uk.rec.cycling.moderated" for the forseeable
> future
...rattle tossed across the room, Trev storms out. Again.
Do you realise just how petulant that makes you look, you old drama queen?
Tim
--
My hearts numbered beat | Greetings from Birmingham, UK
Still echoes in this empty room |All about me: www.nervouscyclist.org
Fear wells in me, but nothing seems| Is your ISP pimping your data?
Enough to defend Dave Matthews| www.badphorm.co.uk
Trevor A Panther
"Tim Dunne" <Bit_B...@Blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:TYGNm.7148$Ym4....@text.news.virginmedia.com...
Well hello again
"rattle tossed across the room, Trev storms out. Again."
my name is Trevor and has never been Trev.
I have no problem with being an old drama queen at all. And I actually see
no sign of storming out at all. --- I have hardly "stormed" into urcm. You
must be an acquaintaince of Clinch with your references to tossing toys. but
i only toss toys -- it might just seem that you toss other more intimate
things when I read your posts!
It is a habit I gave up far too many years ago but I am sure that, even
following your expertise, I could never achieve that status of being such a
WANKER as you!
and oh --- gosh --- I am posting on urc -- not urcm!
Guy.. just this guy, chapman or who ever, is an avid troll wrestler and is a
person who is hugely responsible for the the degredation of urc. Your snide
remarks hardly support any positive case!
The only problem that I come across is tripping up over you sloppy sagging
lip! And stepping aside to avoid the slimy mucous! Or are you sliding down
the same slippery slop that "Just this guy" has prepared for you
Do you actually have anything meaningful to say on the subject.
Can you deny the fact that this bloke "Chapman" was and still remains a TPIA
I shall remain on urc. I shall not post on urcm in the foreseable future.
Oh have I said that before on urc. I certainly haven't said on urcm!
The spirit burner is alight. From such a small flame do forest fires grow..
bye!
james...@gmail.com
> >to prevent spoke breakage at the threads, use a hard setting cement or
> >soft solder or silver solder(preferrable) them.
>
> You must be building your wheels fundamentally incorrectly if this is
> a risk. Mine have only ever broken at the neck, and only ever on the
> Brompton rear wheel.
I've had a few such breakages, but only the wheel where the spokes
were twisted round each other for added stability and performance(*).
The result being that the spoke angles are wrong at the rim.
James
* This is a lie, it was actually an emergency rim replacement with the
wrong length spokes.
james...@gmail.com
<ta...@PSANTISPAMblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> Well hello again
>
Hi Trevor,
I'm sure this can't be doing your blood pressure any good, i recommend
going out for a nice bike ride, maybe having lunch with your Dad, and
posting about it here afterwards. Seriously.
James
Keitht
> You really can't just keep your troll wrestling at bay.
>
> Why don't you just belt up for a change!
>
> 36 is a newcomer to my sin bin but a prime case with his fixations He
> ceased to appear a couple of weeks ago. You cease to appear yet again now
> and are joined by marc
> .
>
Are you talking to anyone in particular of just mumbling in your sleep?
--
Its never too late to reinvent the bicycle
Keitht
>
>
> The spirit burner is alight. From such a small flame do forest fires grow..
>
But the hedgehogs pissed on it.
Clive George
news:3ffd7fc4-9eae-4168...@x5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
AIUI some Rohloff tandem wheels are suffering such breakages from the same
rim angle problem. I'm guessing yours hasn't suffered in that way :-)
Dave Larrington
james...@gmail.com <james...@gmail.com> tweaked the Babbage-Engine to
tell us:
I had three go at the thread in fairly quick succession on a wheel about
five years old with somewhere over 25,000 km on it. Replaced 'em and the
wheel behaved itself until such time as it was retired when I got a SON.
--
Dave Larrington
<http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk>
It's all about mental illness.
james...@gmail.com
>
> AIUI some Rohloff tandem wheels are suffering such breakages from the same
> rim angle problem. I'm guessing yours hasn't suffered in that way :-)
It hasn't had much use to be honest - we simply haven't done much
travelling with the tandem (and for any ride out the door, it's always
second choice). We do have plans for the coming year though.
James
thirty-six
about broken spokes:
> I had three go at the thread in fairly quick succession on a wheel about
> five years old with somewhere over 25,000 km on it. Replaced 'em and the
> wheel behaved itself until such time as it was retired when I got a SON.
>
That sounds like the spokes were generally suffering bending strains
at the nipple. If in an unloaded condition the spokes show no hint of
being near a bending condition at the rim, then it can only be due to
a sinking hub when loaded, it taking the nipple angle to its extreme.
Stabiliszation of the spoke interlace with bow removal will
considerably reduce the angular deviation at the rim which occurs as
the nipple passes through the forward and rearward quadrant of the
wheels cycle.
Marc
> On 23 Nov, 09:11, "Dave Larrington" <n...@legslarry.org.uk> wrote
> about broken spokes:
>
>> I had three go at the thread in fairly quick succession on a wheel about
>> five years old with somewhere over 25,000 km on it. Replaced 'em and the
>> wheel behaved itself until such time as it was retired when I got a SON.
>>
>
> That sounds like the spokes were generally suffering bending strains
> at the nipple. If in an unloaded condition the spokes show no hint of
> being near a bending condition at the rim, then it can only be due to
> a sinking hub when loaded,
Only? There is no other possible reason?
it taking the nipple angle to its extreme.
> Stabiliszation of the spoke interlace with bow removal will
> considerably reduce the angular deviation at the rim which occurs as
> the nipple passes through the forward and rearward quadrant of the
> wheels cycle.
So let me get this straight, your magic pixie dust that makes your
wheels stronger and faster ( how much faster BTW, you never did answer
that?) is for you to put a bend in the spoke, so that the forces on the
hub don't bend the spoke?
Sounds a like a lot like fighting for peace or shagging for virginity to me.
Just zis Guy, you know?
<ne...@legslarry.org.uk> wrote:
>I had three go at the thread in fairly quick succession on a wheel about
>five years old with somewhere over 25,000 km on it. Replaced 'em and the
>wheel behaved itself until such time as it was retired when I got a SON.
Obviously if you had glued, tied and soldered all the spokes on the
wheel then the rest would have been *even more* unbroken.
Marc
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 09:11:54 -0000, "Dave Larrington"
> <ne...@legslarry.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> I had three go at the thread in fairly quick succession on a wheel about
>> five years old with somewhere over 25,000 km on it. Replaced 'em and the
>> wheel behaved itself until such time as it was retired when I got a SON.
>
> Obviously if you had glued, tied and soldered all the spokes on the
> wheel then the rest would have been *even more* unbroken.
>
thirty-six
you are easily confused, I prescribe a bottle o Cptn Morgans and 24hrs
rest. Sleep it all off.
Marc
> On 23 Nov, 18:58, Marc <initial.surn...@btintenret.com> wrote:
>> thirty-six wrote:
>>> On 23 Nov, 09:11, "Dave Larrington" <n...@legslarry.org.uk> wrote
>>> about broken spokes:
>>>> I had three go at the thread in fairly quick succession on a wheel about
>>>> five years old with somewhere over 25,000 km on it. Replaced 'em and the
>>>> wheel behaved itself until such time as it was retired when I got a SON.
>>> That sounds like the spokes were generally suffering bending strains
>>> at the nipple. If in an unloaded condition the spokes show no hint of
>>> being near a bending condition at the rim, then it can only be due to
>>> a sinking hub when loaded,
>> Only? There is no other possible reason?
Still no answer?
thirty-six
Unlikely , but possible that the thread has been cut too sharp and
suffered a little corrosion (negated if a cement is used between
nipple and spoke). Another possibility is that the spoke end have
been misaligned due to faulty installation or later damage caused by
impact.
Marc
So "then it can only be due to a sinking hub when loaded" isn't correct?
thirty-six
I would assume that the examination of the wheel was not be made by an
imbecile such as yourself and would have already pointed out such a
problem as simple as a kniked spoke. As the information as to the
spoke failure was not otherwise forthcoming I find it more than
reasonable to assume that the failure was not obvious and so the
conclusion that it must be failure of the wheel to maintain huh height
is distinctly more than reasonable.
Marc
thirty-six
No, you really are an imbecile.
Marc
Dave Larrington
thirty-six <thirt...@live.co.uk> tweaked the Babbage-Engine to tell us:
> On 23 Nov, 09:11, "Dave Larrington" <n...@legslarry.org.uk> wrote
> about broken spokes:
>
>> I had three go at the thread in fairly quick succession on a wheel
>> about five years old with somewhere over 25,000 km on it. Replaced
>> 'em and the wheel behaved itself until such time as it was retired
>> when I got a SON.
>>
>
> That sounds like the spokes were generally suffering bending strains
> at the nipple. If in an unloaded condition the spokes show no hint of
> being near a bending condition at the rim, then it can only be due to
> a sinking hub when loaded,
This I doubt very much, for two reasons. Firstly only three spokes broke.
Secondly the hub is unlikely to "sink" on a bike with front suspension.
--
Dave Larrington
<http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk>
Hoc ardur vincere docet.
Frank Miller
<guy.c...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 21:34:06 +0000, Marc
><initial...@btintenret.com> wrote:
>
>>Do you think he has enough respect for himself to try and make an
>>attempt at pretending that he has faked some sort of proof, or is he
>>content just to be laughed at, constantly?
>
>He went away the last two times, he seems to be a bit more resistant
>to the spank this time but I guess he'll eventually get bored with
>being ridiculed.
>
>Guy
You really, really are an obnoxious person.
You were one of the main reasons for this group deteriorating in the
first place
You insisted on being objectionable to other posters despite being
told time and time again not to, and being told what would happen if
you continued with your objectionable behavior.
The group deteriorated as predicted.
The new moderated group was set up to try and make things reasonable
for people - both here and there.
It is interesting to note that many of the old school who used to bait
people and be unpleasant are now able to carry out their old behavior
with impunity in the moderated group. Even the moderators take part;
and they can of course ensure that the "arguments" remain one-sided.
I see that you and Marc are being very unpleasant to 36 in the
moderated group - and are getting away with it.
Well - can I suggest that you and your likes stay there.
You, and your antics, are not wanted in the unmoderated group as far
as I am concerend.
thirty-six
An examination of your postings makes this clear to any reasonable
person. You have already proved you are an imbecile.
thirty-six
> Innews:44787204-4af8-4432...@j35g2000vbl.googlegroups.com,
> thirty-six <thirty-...@live.co.uk> tweaked the Babbage-Engine to tell us:
>
> > On 23 Nov, 09:11, "Dave Larrington" <n...@legslarry.org.uk> wrote
> > about broken spokes:
>
> >> I had three go at the thread in fairly quick succession on a wheel
> >> about five years old with somewhere over 25,000 km on it. Replaced
> >> 'em and the wheel behaved itself until such time as it was retired
> >> when I got a SON.
>
> > That sounds like the spokes were generally suffering bending strains
> > at the nipple. If in an unloaded condition the spokes show no hint of
> > being near a bending condition at the rim, then it can only be due to
> > a sinking hub when loaded,
>
> This I doubt very much, for two reasons. Firstly only three spokes broke.
> Secondly the hub is unlikely to "sink" on a bike with front suspension.
You haven't supplied much detail as to the wheelbuild, I can only
assume it was a typical bicycle wheel. I was thinking it to be a
tandem wheel (?) which tend to stretch the ability of the rim to
support the nipple at an extreme angle. Even so, unless the spokes
have been damaged by making permanent bends near the threads by
accident or design, they are unlikely to break here unless they are
experiencing active bending with normal wheel loadings. Only by
testing will you know whether a hub will sink wrt the upper part of
the rim.
Naqerj
>
> Unlikely , but possible that the thread has been cut too sharp
May I interject a bit of pedantry here? Spoke threads are not cut,
they're rolled.
Mine dew, I do have a spoke thread cutter - it will produce a lovely
thread on the end of a spoke, but the spoke is useless as I can't get
nipples for cut threads.
--
Andrew
thirty-six
> thirty-six wrote:
>
> > Unlikely , but possible that the thread has been cut too sharp
>
> May I interject a bit of pedantry here? Spoke threads are not cut,
> they're rolled.
Unless they are cut.
>
> Mine dew, I do have a spoke thread cutter - it will produce a lovely
> thread on the end of a spoke, but the spoke is useless as I can't get
> nipples for cut threads.
There you go.
Never really taken notice of thread forms. Always got spokes and
nipples together. I believe the spoke threads to be similar to the
electrical BA series. So you may be able to reform a thread, or cut a
14swg in a 15swg nipple, with a BA tap.
Naqerj
> On 25 Nov, 20:37, Naqerj <pat...@globalnet.co.invalid> wrote:
>> thirty-six wrote:
>>
>>> Unlikely , but possible that the thread has been cut too sharp
>> May I interject a bit of pedantry here? Spoke threads are not cut,
>> they're rolled.
>
> Unless they are cut.
Which they haven't been for many years.
>> Mine dew, I do have a spoke thread cutter - it will produce a lovely
>> thread on the end of a spoke, but the spoke is useless as I can't get
>> nipples for cut threads.
>
> There you go.
Not really ... it's an ancient bit of machinery.
>
> Never really taken notice of thread forms. Always got spokes and
> nipples together. I believe the spoke threads to be similar to the
> electrical BA series. So you may be able to reform a thread, or cut a
> 14swg in a 15swg nipple, with a BA tap.
They're different. 14swg comes about halfway between 8BA and 9BA.
Spokes are an odd thread too. I can't find the numbers at the moment -
I know I've got them somewhere ... but where? - but, for instance, 15,
14 & 13swg all have the same tpi, unlike most normal threads where the
number of tpi increases as the diameter decreases.
--
Andrew
thirty-six
> Not really ... it's an ancient bit of machinery.
>
> > Never really taken notice of thread forms. Always got spokes and
> > nipples together. I believe the spoke threads to be similar to the
> > electrical BA series. So you may be able to reform a thread, or cut a
> > 14swg in a 15swg nipple, with a BA tap.
>
> They're different. 14swg comes about halfway between 8BA and 9BA.
> Spokes are an odd thread too. I can't find the numbers at the moment -
> I know I've got them somewhere ... but where? - but, for instance, 15,
> 14 & 13swg all have the same tpi, unlike most normal threads where the
> number of tpi increases as the diameter decreases.
I think that thread form has changed to that thirty years ago in
common usage. Even the English cheap spokes I got ten years ago seem
to be the same thread as a DT. There seemed to be a difference
between English and continental spokes thirty years ago. Same pitch,
slightly different diameter meant you could force a tight nipple onto
a spoke, dont know which way it was, but sure hurt my fingers with a
cyclo mini spoke key.
If the thread pitch was coarser for the thicker spokes then it would
be difficult to set the spoke length accurately and a strong hand
would be needed using a regular tool. It would also make it more
difficult for the buider to go between spoke gauges because of the
difference in feel at the nipple key. I think the pitch is based on
the 15swg in the BA series and maintained for 14 and (you say) 13.
12 is likely to be different for it is a motorcycle gauge and they use
a nipple key more like a typical crescent wrench.