Joel I agree. It is a matter of preference. I love having nice parts on my bikes whenever possible. Perhaps you are also right that the weight of 4 more spokes is insignificant. I haven't compared the weights of my 40h and 36h rear wheels, so I don't know. I also agree that choosing what goes into your panniers is the most significant factor in overall weight (other than body weight). However, aren't 40h hubs (Phil or otherwise) generally quite a bit more expensive than 36h Shimano XT's? The latter work just fine for extended touring. For folks on any kind of a budget, who want to have strong, functional gear, it makes sense not to overbuild with expensive parts when less expensive, but good quality parts will do.
In my field (adventure/outdoor education), I see a lot of folks, mainly middle-aged people like me, who delay their dream adventures in order to purchase the "best" tools for those adventures. The cost for many is having to work longer to pay for the experience instead of taking the TIME for the actual experience. Sadly, for some people, planning and buying gear is the extent of their progress towards their dream trip. That said, I also think that planning and buying gear are fun and valid parts of the overall experience of adventuring - but they're not THE adventure. OK, I'm ranging waaay off topic here and I'll stop. Gary, did you get your answer?? Dave On Feb 4, 8:49 am, JoelMatthews <joelmatth...@mac.com> wrote: > > I agree with Dave... the 40 and 48 hole rims seem like overkill. I've > > done week long tours on handbuilt 32h wheels. > > It is a matter of preference. 40h rims are not more expensive than > 36h. A lot of choices on what goes into the panniers are going to > have far more impact on weight than 4 spokes. > > I certainly do not think having 40h wheels are a critical for my > completing a tour. But overkill meaning what? Not like I have lost > anything having them. As my 40h wheels are built around smooth > rolling Maxicar hubs, I get a plush ride few wheelsets can match. > > On Feb 4, 9:38 am, Michael_S <mikeybi...@rocketmail.com> wrote: > > > > > I agree with Dave... the 40 and 48 hole rims seem like overkill. I've > > done week long tours on handbuilt 32h wheels. I weigh about 190lbs .If > > you use good stiff rims ( Dyad's in my case), thr right spokes and fat > > tires a 36 hole rim is plenty. > > > ~Mike > > > On Feb 4, 7:29 am, Dave Craig <dcr...@prescott.edu> wrote: > > > > Gary > > > > I weigh 205 and I run the stock 26" rims on my Long Haul Trucker with > > > Schwalbe Marathon Supremes (26x50). As I wrote in another post, the > > > fatter tires are now my choice for all loaded tours. > > > > I know you didn't ask about your choice of 40h rims, but I thought I > > > might add some unsolicited advice. I have never had a well-built, 36- > > > hole wheel fail on a tour - poor stock rims, yes - but not handbuilt > > > wheels. I think lots of folks make the assumption that more is better > > > for expeditioning. A 40 hole rim seems way overbuilt for front wheels > > > for someone your size. With a 26-inch wheel, 40h in the rear also > > > seems excessive. Here's another consideration: I had a nice, custom > > > 40h rear wheel on my Bombadil during one tour. When the rim self- > > > destructed due to a manufacturing defect, I was hard-pressed to find > > > an easily available replacement rim on which I could use my expensive > > > 40h hub. I ended up using a cheap (< $100) 36h wheel for the last half > > > of the tour and it worked just as well as the $400 wheel it replaced. > > > Save yourself some money for panniers, etc. You could go with a > > > cheaper front wheel at least. > > > > With tires as nice as the Scwalbe Supremes and the versatility of > > > fatter tires, I really don't see any reason to run thinner tires for > > > loaded touring or rough riding unless your bike won't accommodate the > > > fat ones. > > > > Dave > > > > On Jan 28, 2:07 pm, Gary <g...@worldcyclotour.com> wrote: > > > > > I'm looking to get a new touring wheelset and would like some > > > > feedback. The wheels will be 26", used fully loaded. Me 200lbs 6'4", > > > > bike fully loaded, 60% on road 40% offroad. 40 hole Phils, tires 1.75 > > > > maybe 2.0. Now the questions. > > > > > 24mm or 27mm rim width and limitations for each with regard to > > > > minimum/ maximum tire size for the rims? > > > > > What would be the safe minimum tire width on either and still be safe > > > > (pinch flats etc.) for rough riding. > > > > > What would be the maximum tire width (stability) for each. > > > > > I'm needing to pick my poison. > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Gary- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
