DT spoke question 1.8/1.6/1.8
RS
Zipp ballistic hub laced 32/2x to a Mavic Open4 CD rim. Wheel absolutely
stays in true, I've used it fairly heavily for a couple of years now. Nipples
are gold colored and evidently alloy. Spokes clearly have the DT logo on the
ends. A tech measured them today with a micrometer and they are
1.8mm/1.6mm/1.8mm. To check accuracy he measure my rear wheel
which is laced with DT Competition spokes and got right on:
2.0mm/1.8mm/2.0mm.
I cannot find this spoke < 1.8/1.6/1.8 > in the current catalogue. Is this a
discontinued spoke? Would the DT Revolution 2.0/1.5/2.0 be a roughly
equivilant spoke?
thanks
Zog The Undeniable
I've never seen the 1.8/1.6/1.8 either. The 2.0/1.8/2.0 is the usual DT
Competition spoke.
Revolutions are very hard to build with because of twist, and I wouldn't
recommend them. I have a lovely front track wheel built with Revs, but
it took hours and hours.
Qui si parla Campagnolo
15/16/15 gauge spokes were common, but now less so. My spoke supplier
still has some lengths but I would just use a Rev spoke, it is roughly
equivalent, but more expensive.
Kinky Cowboy
Sapim list a 1.8/1.6/1.8 Race spoke if you need a match for single
spoke replacement.
Kinky Cowboy*
*Batteries not included
May contain traces of nuts
Your milage may vary
phs...@gmail.com
The 1.8/1.6 mm DT Swiss comp. spoke does exist, but is rare:
http://bike-components.de/catalog/Rims+&+Spokes/Spokes/Competition+1,8
1,6+Speichen+mit+Messing-Nippeln+(100+St.)
http://www.dtswiss.com/getdoc/02e74b95-35e2-4408-9ee5-48a7c0d70dd9/TechnicalDatasheet.aspx
(I notice that DT Swiss now makes white Competition spokes)
Allegedly this size is a very good compromise regarding weight,
strength, aerodynamics, and the ability to be tightened while not
twisting too much. The 2.0/1.5 Revolution spokes are said to twist
much much more.
The problem with the spoke size (and the reason why the Revolution
spoke exist) is probably logistics: You need special 1.8 mm thread
nipples, while almost all other spoke models can use std. 2 mm
nipples. Not only do you need to special nipples, but I believe that a
std. 2 mm nipple may just fit good enough on a 1.8 mm spoke thread to
cause havoc when the wheel is assembled. So you also need to keep the
to nipples strictly separate. (The gold color may be part of the wheel-
builders scheme to keep it apart from std. nipples). 1.8/1.6 mm spokes
are also hard to distinguish visually from 2/1.8 mm spokes, which can
be a further source of confusion at the wheel-builder.
Most wheel-building LBS's I know of have a hard time even to stock
regular swaged spokes in anything else but the most common sizes.
Adding 1.8/1.6 mm spokes to their stock would increase their inventory
with little economic gain.
--
Regards
jim beam
jobstian knowledge pollution alert: unless you have a specific spoke in
mind [d.t.], the correct term for a narrowed gauge spoke is "butted", not
swaged. swaging is a specific process, hammering, and it's not used by
all spoke manufacturers. other processes include drawing [sapim] and
grinding [apparently wheelsmith].
Qui si parla Campagnolo
> On 29 Dec., 08:43, RS <r_schil...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > I have a 700c front road wheel, evidently from the mid 90s. 1st Generation
> > Zipp ballistic hub laced 32/2x to a Mavic Open4 CD rim. Wheel absolutely
> > stays in true, I've used it fairly heavily for a couple of years now. Nipples
> > are gold colored and evidently alloy. Spokes clearly have the DT logo on the
> > ends. A tech measured them today with a micrometer and they are
> > 1.8mm/1.6mm/1.8mm. To check accuracy he measure my rear wheel
> > which is laced with DT Competition spokes and got right on:
> > 2.0mm/1.8mm/2.0mm.
>
> > I cannot find this spoke < 1.8/1.6/1.8 > in the current catalogue. Is this a
> > discontinued spoke? Would the DT Revolution 2.0/1.5/2.0 be a roughly
> > equivilant spoke?
>
> > thanks
>
> The 1.8/1.6 mm DT Swiss comp. spoke does exist, but is rare:http://bike-components.de/catalog/Rims+&+Spokes/Spokes/Competition+1,8
> (I notice that DT Swiss now makes white Competition spokes)
>
> Allegedly this size is a very good compromise regarding weight,
> strength, aerodynamics, and the ability to be tightened while not
> twisting too much. The 2.0/1.5 Revolution spokes are said to twist
> much much more.
>
> The problem with the spoke size (and the reason why the Revolution
> spoke exist) is probably logistics: You need special 1.8 mm thread
> nipples, while almost all other spoke models can use std. 2 mm
> nipples. Not only do you need to special nipples, but I believe that a
> std. 2 mm nipple may just fit good enough on a 1.8 mm spoke thread to
> cause havoc when the wheel is assembled. So you also need to keep the
> to nipples strictly separate. (The gold color may be part of the wheel-
> builders scheme to keep it apart from std. nipples). 1.8/1.6 mm spokes
> are also hard to distinguish visually from 2/1.8 mm spokes, which can
> be a further source of confusion at the wheel-builder.
> Most wheel-building LBS's I know of have a hard time even to stock
> regular swaged spokes in anything else but the most common sizes.
> Adding 1.8/1.6 mm spokes to their stock would increase their inventory
> with little economic gain.
>
> --
> Regards
Yep, we have 14/15 comps and Revs, silver and black. 15/16 has their
place but doesn't do anything a 14/15 doesn't do.
What is not worthwhile is straight gauge. cheaper but butted make for
a styronger wheel, all else being equal.
jim beam
> Yep, we have 14/15 comps and Revs, silver and black. 15/16 has their
> place but doesn't do anything a 14/15 doesn't do. What is not worthwhile
> is straight gauge. cheaper but butted make for a styronger wheel, all
> else being equal.
as a matter of terminology, technically, that should be "more fatigue
resistant", not "stronger".
it really depends what you mean by "strength". skinnier spokes are more
elastic, so the wheel is not stiffer - a potential issue with highly
dished wheels. and in single cycle, straight gauge can be loaded more
before fracture.
where butted spokes have the advantage is that they can last longer in
that they don't exert as much bending moment on the spoke elbow, thus they
fatigue less. their elasticity also arguably makes them slightly more
comfortable.
once you go to straight-pull spokes, the fatigue advantage of butting
disappears and straight gauge is the way to go. or bladed if you want to
hammer the otherwise straight gauge spokes flat.
jim beam
revo's are not very equivalent because the thinner diameter makes them
considerably more elastic than the 1.6, even if it doesn't sound much on
paper. if you can't find another spoke the same [have you called zipp?],
there may be some old stock spokes still around in a local shop. and i
believe, some d.t. spokes in this gauge were branded as ritchie also.
Chalo
>
> phs123 wrote:
> >
> > Most wheel-building LBS's I know of
> > have a hard time even to stock regular swaged spokes
>
> jobstian knowledge pollution alert: unless you have a specific spoke in
> mind [d.t.],
That does seem to be implied by the thread subject line.
> the correct term for a narrowed gauge spoke is "butted", not
> swaged. swaging is a specific process, hammering, and it's not used by
> all spoke manufacturers. other processes include drawing [sapim] and
> grinding [apparently wheelsmith].
It seems like you're basically alone in your objection to the use of
this term. Even those of us who, like me, use the term "butted" out
of old habit, are familiar with the usage and meaning of "swaged" in
this context.
http://sheldonbrown.com/wheelbuild.html#spokes
I think it's fine to characterize e.g. flat blade screwdrivers as
swaged tools, even if there are some few examples of screwdrivers that
are manufactured by a different method.
Chalo
jim beam
>jim beam wrote:
>>
> phs123 wrote:
>> >
>> > Most wheel-building LBS's I know of
>> > have a hard time even to stock regular swaged spokes
>>
>> jobstian knowledge pollution alert: unless you have a specific spoke in
>> mind [d.t.],
>
> That does seem to be implied by the thread subject line.
but the context "regular swaged spokes" is still wrong. the spokes are
butted, and they've been butted by a swaging process.
>
>> the correct term for a narrowed gauge spoke is "butted", not
>> swaged. swaging is a specific process, hammering, and it's not used by
>> all spoke manufacturers. other processes include drawing [sapim] and
>> grinding [apparently wheelsmith].
>
> It seems like you're basically alone in your objection to the use of
> this term.
it seems i'm also "alone" in spotting a bunch of the mistakes in jobst's
other works also, but that doesn't mean i'm wrong.
> Even those of us who, like me, use the term "butted" out
> of old habit, are familiar with the usage and meaning of "swaged" in
> this context.
>
> http://sheldonbrown.com/wheelbuild.html#spokes
sheldon got bullied into using jobst's words, but that doesn't mean
sheldon was correct. unfortunately.
>
> I think it's fine to characterize e.g. flat blade screwdrivers as
> swaged tools, even if there are some few examples of screwdrivers that
> are manufactured by a different method.
>
swaging is a process, not a form.
A Muzi
Unsure about DT but 15g butted stainless spokes are not rare. Length?
--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
A Muzi
There are still riders (yes, we are old and dying off now) who prefer
15/17g front wheel spokes. A noted contributor here prefers 15g front
and rear. Wheel builders often will have common lengths in both formats
(granted many more 14g than 15g; but not zero 15g)
Any wheel builder can feel 14g and/or 15g spokes and sort them quickly.
This is not rocket science by feel, no caliper needed. With a caliper it
is still quick (if you have never done this before).
The gold color is not a size label. Aluminum nipples are readily
available in many anodized colors, both 14g and 15g. I and every
wheelbuilder here think hard brass nipples are a better choice overall,
but the world is filled with optional product. We actually have gold
anodized nipples in 14g and 15g in stock. (and red, blue, etc etc).
You make an excellent point about screwing up a build with 15g spokes in
14g nipples. We see that in home builds every now and again. Until
adequate tension is achieved, it looks just like a bicycle wheel!
Lastly, I believe every major spoke manufacturer makes both formats yet.
A Muzi
>>>> Most wheel-building LBS's I know of
>>>> have a hard time even to stock regular swaged spokes
>> jim beam wrote:
>>> jobstian knowledge pollution alert: unless you have a specific spoke in
>>> mind [d.t.],
> Chalo wrote:
>> That does seem to be implied by the thread subject line.
jim beam wrote:
> but the context "regular swaged spokes" is still wrong. the spokes are
> butted, and they've been butted by a swaging process.
-snip-
USA and German spoke packaging was once clearly marked "swadged". It's
accepted industry jargon from a prior era.
russell...@yahoo.com
> On Mon, 29 Dec 2008 11:46:31 -0800, Chalo wrote:
> >jim beam wrote:
>
> > phs123 wrote:
>
> >> > Most wheel-building LBS's I know of
> >> > have a hard time even to stock regular swaged spokes
>
> >> jobstian knowledge pollution alert: unless you have a specific spoke in
> >> mind [d.t.],
Are you aware Mr. Brandt has not even contributed to this thread?
>
> > That does seem to be implied by the thread subject line.
>
> but the context "regular swaged spokes" is still wrong. the spokes are
> butted, and they've been butted by a swaging process.
>
>
>
> >> the correct term for a narrowed gauge spoke is "butted", not
> >> swaged. swaging is a specific process, hammering, and it's not used by
> >> all spoke manufacturers. other processes include drawing [sapim] and
> >> grinding [apparently wheelsmith].
>
> > It seems like you're basically alone in your objection to the use of
> > this term.
>
> it seems i'm also "alone" in spotting a bunch of the mistakes in jobst's
> other works also, but that doesn't mean i'm wrong.
Are you aware Mr. Brandt has not even contributed to this thread?
>
> > Even those of us who, like me, use the term "butted" out
> > of old habit, are familiar with the usage and meaning of "swaged" in
> > this context.
>
> >http://sheldonbrown.com/wheelbuild.html#spokes
>
> sheldon got bullied into using jobst's words, but that doesn't mean
> sheldon was correct. unfortunately.
Are you aware Mr. Brandt has not even contributed to this thread?
Jay Beattie
> phs...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On 29 Dec., 08:43, RS <r_schil...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >> I have a 700c front road wheel, evidently from the mid 90s. 1st Generation
> >> Zipp ballistic hub laced 32/2x to a Mavic Open4 CD rim. Wheel absolutely
> >> stays in true, I've used it fairly heavily for a couple of years now. Nipples
> >> are gold colored and evidently alloy. Spokes clearly have the DT logo on the
> >> ends. A tech measured them today with a micrometer and they are
> >> 1.8mm/1.6mm/1.8mm. To check accuracy he measure my rear wheel
> >> which is laced with DT Competition spokes and got right on:
> >> 2.0mm/1.8mm/2.0mm.
>
> >> I cannot find this spoke < 1.8/1.6/1.8 > in the current catalogue. Is this a
> >> discontinued spoke? Would the DT Revolution 2.0/1.5/2.0 be a roughly
> >> equivilant spoke?
>
> >> thanks
>
> > The 1.8/1.6 mm DT Swiss comp. spoke does exist, but is rare:
> >http://bike-components.de/catalog/Rims+&+Spokes/Spokes/Competition+1,8
> > 1,6+Speichen+mit+Messing-Nippeln+(100+St.)
Although DT 2.0 nipples look different from 1.8 nipples. I don't have
two in front of me here at work, but one or the other has a slightly
rounded and raised lip at the receiver end while the other is totally
flat. It's a slight but noticeable difference, and I rarely confuse
the two. If I have any question, I just try the nipple on a 2.0 spoke,
and if it fits, its not a 1.8. I still use DT 1.8/1.6 on 36 spoke
wheels and like them. Light and elastic, and they make for a nice
durable front or rear wheel, even at my weight. I still have some of
that olde tyme fear of light spokes, so in 32 spoke wheels, I use
2.0/1.8. -- Jay Beattie.
Chalo
>
> once you go to straight-pull spokes, the fatigue advantage of butting
> disappears and straight gauge is the way to go.
So, you are saying that spokes never break anywhere except at the
bend.
Chalo
jim beam
read the rest of the thread chalo - don't knee-jerk. thanks.
Chalo
>
> There are still riders (yes, we are old and dying off now) who prefer
> 15/17g front wheel spokes. A noted contributor here prefers 15g front
> and rear. Wheel builders often will have common lengths in both formats
> (granted many more 14g than 15g; but not zero 15g)
I prefer 15/16ga. (1.8/1.6/1.8mm) spokes when I can get them, or when
I need enough of one size to justify buying a box at a time.
The wheels that are stacking up the most miles for me in the last few
years are laced up with forty-eight 15/16ga. spokes in a cross-five
pattern, on Sachs VT3000 and HT5020 drum brake hubs.
> Lastly, I believe every major spoke manufacturer makes both formats yet.
Thank goodness. The tone of this discussion was leading me to believe
that light gauge spokes had become a casualty of the low-spoke-count
wheel fad.
Chalo
Andre Jute
> You make an excellent point about screwing up a build with 15g spokes in
> 14g nipples. We see that in home builds every now and again. Until
> adequate tension is achieved, it looks just like a bicycle wheel!
I used to say that difference between a successful space-frame as a
structure and a failed "space-frame" as a mechanism could easily be
demonstrated with a pallet tractor. One day I was challenged to do so.
We borrowed a pallet tractor from next door and first I put the
spaceframe I designed on the prongs and just pushed against it against
the wall. The wheels spun and smoked, I had coir mats nailed down
under laths to give me more traction, and eventually, after we
substituted the biggest pallet tractor we could find, the wall fell
down. The true space frame was unharmed. Then the ultralight
"spaceframe" that I refused to drive was put on the prongs. It folded
against (another) wall at the first application of a heavy foot on the
throttle of the pallet tractor. The irony is that the dangerous
scissors-mechanism was only 13 ounces (not even two per cent) lighter
than my proper spaceframe, which later handled 250 rear-wheel bhp
without ever breathing heavily.
Andre Jute
Being a weight weenie requires an elevated level of expertise -- Andre
Jute, decades before he took up cycling
Tom Sherman
> [...]
> jobstian knowledge pollution alert: unless you have a specific spoke in
> mind [d.t.], the correct term for a narrowed gauge spoke is "butted", not
> swaged. swaging is a specific process, hammering, and it's not used by
> all spoke manufacturers. other processes include drawing [sapim] and
I understand Wheelsmith stopped grinding to create butted spokes when
the manufacturing operations were moved from Montana to the corner of
64th and Florist using different equipment formerly used by Asahi in Japan.
--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
LOCAL CACTUS EATS CYCLIST - datakoll