Corish Posted March 12, 2005 Report Share Posted March 12, 2005 Right, I was wondering why on earth are hubs like they are? I mean the flanges. One side is bigger than the other one a lot of them, but is there a reason? Thanks, Corish Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark W Posted March 12, 2005 Report Share Posted March 12, 2005 More strenght on either the drive side or disc side of a hub? 'cos of the longer flanges meaning shorter spokes which theoretically means a stronger wheel? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tartridge Posted March 12, 2005 Report Share Posted March 12, 2005 More strenght on either the drive side or disc side of a hub? 'cos of the longer flanges meaning shorter spokes which theoretically means a stronger wheel? ← I think thats something to do with clearing the freehub body, Mark :unsure: Flanges are generally made as small as possible, so the hub is light. Unless you go the other way, and have huge flanges with holes (Am Classic for example). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark W Posted March 12, 2005 Report Share Posted March 12, 2005 Fair enough :"> This is what lack of sleep does... Does how burly the hub is affect it much? 'cos my old T-something wheelset with the tiny, tiny rear hub had a really small diameter hub with some small flanges, and my T-Master hub on my new wheel's got a bloody fat hub, with some small flanges. Is there any "right" size to have it or anything? Or is the flange size not necessarily relevent to the hub diameter? I need sleep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brisa Posted March 12, 2005 Report Share Posted March 12, 2005 (edited) What about them shimano deore hubs that the spokes slotted into the hub body? Bad design? Edited March 12, 2005 by Brisa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
that NBR dude Posted March 12, 2005 Report Share Posted March 12, 2005 What about them shimano deore hubs that the spokes slotted into the hub body? Bad design? ← I believe the idea of that hub, was so you could change a spoke, without re-building the entire wheel or something :unsure: I may be wrong though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Nichols Posted March 12, 2005 Report Share Posted March 12, 2005 What about them shimano deore hubs that the spokes slotted into the hub body? Bad design? ← I can't think of the EXACT hub your talking about... BUT I know with the more expensive wheel sets XT XTR etc they use a similar design to the Mavic crossmaxs whereby the spokes slot into the hub the same way the spoke slots into the rim... straight in. This helps for less hub and theoretically a lighter wheel... that’s the idea anyway! I think the main problem with shimano and companies like them is that they are EXPECTED to innovate every year and this causes problems (hence the 'reinventing of the wheel' !) I mean the sti style levers they brought out last year was a BIG mistake, sram must have made so much money because of all the xc riders, dh riders and trials riders who use their products for a sport that suffers big problems with levers that flap up and down. So basically, just because something’s different to the norm doesn't mean it's any better. Things were better in the good old days, eh what! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Arnold Posted March 12, 2005 Report Share Posted March 12, 2005 I can't think of the EXACT hub your talking about... BUT I know with the more expensive wheel sets XT XTR etc they use a similar design to the Mavic crossmaxs whereby the spokes slot into the hub the same way the spoke slots into the rim... straight in. This helps for less hub and theoretically a lighter wheel... that’s the idea anyway! I think the main problem with shimano and companies like them is that they are EXPECTED to innovate every year and this causes problems (hence the 'reinventing of the wheel' !) I mean the sti style levers they brought out last year was a BIG mistake, sram must have made so much money because of all the xc riders, dh riders and trials riders who use their products for a sport that suffers big problems with levers that flap up and down. So basically, just because something’s different to the norm doesn't mean it's any better. Things were better in the good old days, eh what! ← how do you mean forced to innovate? ta Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark W Posted March 12, 2005 Report Share Posted March 12, 2005 People always expect them to improve, but once bearing quality's reached a certain standard, spoke techonology has improved to a certain quality and so on, there's only so much you can do; so the nipple's-at-the-hub hubs come about I guess. Plus weird spoke configurations too... Also, it keeps Shimano afficianados buying their product year after year, I suppose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Nichols Posted March 13, 2005 Report Share Posted March 13, 2005 hehe, I do believe that’s the first time you've agreed with me Mark! So yeah Will it's basically what Mark said - If Shimano kept selling the same product every year there would be no need for people to buy the new years stock (unless things broke) and this is basically a catch 23 (much worse than catch 22!! (Y)) situation... Shimano products when used for XC like they were designed, with the exception of saint etc, are very very strong and good quality, which is why people buy it... But this means that they aren't going to buy next years because last years are still working great - hence innovation. Hope that clears it up :lol: I'm crap at explaining things! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.