Mavic city speed disc wheelset?

[mstone]

@Greenbelt 22399 wrote:

I’m thinking about upgrading the wheels on my commuter bike. The wheels that came stock are starting to get annoying — broken spokes getting more common and getting harder to keep in true.

I heard about these last night — made for 700 size and disk brakes. Anyone have experience with these wheels? They’re not cheap so wanted to get some opinions if possible before I order. -Jeff

My immediate reaction would be that with the problems you’re describing you’re going in the wrong direction with a 24 spoke 2x wheel. I’ve heard of people liking them, but I’m old fashioned and I want more metal under me. More info on the bike might help.

[Greenbelt]

@mstone 22452 wrote:

More info on the bike might help.

It’s a pretty heavy steel touring bike with disk brakes — Jamis Bosanova. Looking for more durability mostly, but lighter weight would be nice.

[Greenbelt]

Found these 29″ wheels — in stock! I don’t know why we were searching only for disk 700s — 29″ is the same size, and there are lots of disk brake MTB wheels out there.

My ride in was SOOO much faster, I swear. Actually when the mechanics spun my old wheels on the axle, they just shook their heads — hubs were totally shot. New wheels = great upgrade.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]1407[/ATTACH]

[ShawnoftheDread]

@Greenbelt 26605 wrote:

Found these 29″ wheels — in stock! I don’t know why we were searching only for disk 700s — 29″ is the same size, and there are lots of disk brake MTB wheels out there.

My ride in was SOOO much faster, I swear. Actually when the mechanics spun my old wheels on the axle, they just shook their heads — hubs were totally shot. New wheels = great upgrade.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]1407[/ATTACH]

700c and 29″ wheels are the same size? I thought 700c was slightly smaller than 27″. I have a lot to learn.

[Greenbelt]

Apparently it has been the subject of lots of discussion/confusion!

http://forums.mtbr.com/29er-components/29er-vs-700c-tire-565880.html

Not a good picture, but my Schwalbe Marathon 700x35c tires mounted up on the 29″ wheel just fine:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]1408[/ATTACH]

[ShawnoftheDread]

Wow. Does this mean that 29ers are not really 29ers? Is it just a marketing ploy to make mountain bikers feel better about themselves?

[mstone]

This is why the ISO system makes so much more sense than most of the other naming conventions out there. In that notation you buy something like 35-622, where the first number is the width in mm and the second is the bead diameter. Both 700c and 29er are -622. Note that “30 inch” bikes are showing up, because having a bike with a bigger tire implies that you have a bigger…tube. They’re still -622. The one thing to watch out for is that the width of the rim is appropriate for the width of the tire. The main reason everything doesn’t just use ISO names I think is because there’s less opportunity for marketing bs.

[krazygl00]

Careful when talking about going to 29er wheels on a 700c frame. Remember that the rear dropout spacing will be different. MTB=135mm, road=130mm.

Why not consider some custom handbuilt wheels? This is a great investment for any rider. Bill Mould at Spokes is an excellent wheel builder.

[mstone]

@krazygl00 26624 wrote:

Careful when talking about going to 29er wheels on a 700c frame. Remember that the rear dropout spacing will be different. MTB=135mm, road=130mm.

Why not consider some custom handbuilt wheels? This is a great investment for any rider. Bill Mould at Spokes is an excellent wheel builder.

You definitely want to get the right size hub, but that means actually checking rather than relying on a particular marketing name. (I’m on a bike that was sold with 32-622 tires, not marketed as 29er, with 135 spacing; that’s more common than not with disc brakes, I think.)

How cheap is spokes? In my experience the cost of entry for custom built is pretty steep for most commuter bikes.

[Greenbelt]

@krazygl00 26624 wrote:

Careful when talking about going to 29er wheels on a 700c frame. Remember that the rear dropout spacing will be different. MTB=135mm, road=130mm.

Why not consider some custom handbuilt wheels? This is a great investment for any rider. Bill Mould at Spokes is an excellent wheel builder.

Great point — with a steel frame, it was easy to just expand the clearance a bit to put the MTB wheel on. So that wasn’t an issue for my bike, but could be with others.

In fact, at first the mechanic was concerned that the stretched spacing could affect the brake rotor alignment — but that didn’t turn out to be any problem either.

[DaveK]

@Greenbelt 26630 wrote:

Great point — with a steel frame, it was easy to just expand the clearance a bit to put the MTB wheel on. So that wasn’t an issue for my bike, but could be with others.

In fact, at first the mechanic was concerned that the stretched spacing could affect the brake rotor alignment — but that didn’t turn out to be any problem either.

Your frame may have been intended to do just that – some steel cross or touring frames are built with a 132.5mm spacing and are intended to fit road and mountain wheelsets.

[Greenbelt]

@DaveK 26638 wrote:

Your frame may have been intended to do just that – some steel cross or touring frames are built with a 132.5mm spacing and are intended to fit road and mountain wheelsets.

Yup, it’s a tweener — 132.5mm. Now why the bike makers don’t fully standardize on one or the other (or the tween) is a mystery to me…

[Certifried]

@Greenbelt 26652 wrote:

Yup, it’s a tweener — 132.5mm. Now why the bike makers don’t fully standardize on one or the other (or the tween) is a mystery to me…

I don’t think they could standardize on the ‘tween’. I’m not sure how flexible aluminum or CF would be, but steel sure can be bent!

[mstone]

@Greenbelt 26652 wrote:

Yup, it’s a tweener — 132.5mm. Now why the bike makers don’t fully standardize on one or the other (or the tween) is a mystery to me…

The middle size works best on steel bikes, and even there some people hate having to yank the frame when changing tires. My perception is that it’s becoming less common, but I may be wrong. As for why there are two, 135 is more practical, but 130 is more pro. Take heart! I’m sure road bikes will move to 135 just about when other bikes move to 140, per the historical trend.

[DaveK]

@mstone 26658 wrote:

The middle size works best on steel bikes, and even there some people hate having to yank the frame when changing tires. My perception is that it’s becoming less common, but I may be wrong. As for why there are two, 135 is more practical, but 130 is more pro. Take heart! I’m sure road bikes will move to 135 just about when other bikes move to 140, per the historical trend.

Actually the newest road disc frames seem to use 135 as their rear spacing, so I think that move might happen sooner rather than later.

[Author]

Posts