T Head Spoke Compatiablity
Moderator: robbosmans
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com
AFAIK there is no standard for T-heads, thus it is impossible to give a generalized answer. But even if we were to completely ignore how well the T-head itself would fit against the hub, typically the point of such proprietary heads would be to have far wider bladed spokes than would fit through a standard straightpull hub. So in most cases the answer would be no.
As a replacement spoke? Should be fine. If you have them, go ahead and try them. If you're buying 8 replacement spoke kits to save money, do something else.
That T head is really a nail head spoke turned into a Y shape, so you've got two flat spots at the fold as thick as the spoke reinforced by the folded up area. The T (nail head) isn't a machined flat surface on the contact side, so it's not relying on perfect contact with the hub. The hub spoke hole will support the spoke laterally, so the head is just a stopper.
The one issue you might run into- the standard hubs (like a DT 350 SP you buy online) only take 2.3 or 2.2 spoke blades. If you harvested some spokes from a factory built wheelset, they might have larger spoke blades- you'll need to ream the holes out with a diamond jewelry bit and a Dremel. I ran into this trying to use spokes from a DT Swiss g1800 wheel in a std hub.
If you're trying to save money on spokes, look up CSC on EBay and get Pillar 1422 or 1423 xtra for about $.80 a piece. Unless you're really pushing it on spoke count, you don't need the $3-4 cx-ray or DT Aero spokes.
That T head is really a nail head spoke turned into a Y shape, so you've got two flat spots at the fold as thick as the spoke reinforced by the folded up area. The T (nail head) isn't a machined flat surface on the contact side, so it's not relying on perfect contact with the hub. The hub spoke hole will support the spoke laterally, so the head is just a stopper.
The one issue you might run into- the standard hubs (like a DT 350 SP you buy online) only take 2.3 or 2.2 spoke blades. If you harvested some spokes from a factory built wheelset, they might have larger spoke blades- you'll need to ream the holes out with a diamond jewelry bit and a Dremel. I ran into this trying to use spokes from a DT Swiss g1800 wheel in a std hub.
If you're trying to save money on spokes, look up CSC on EBay and get Pillar 1422 or 1423 xtra for about $.80 a piece. Unless you're really pushing it on spoke count, you don't need the $3-4 cx-ray or DT Aero spokes.
Gotcha. I've just found a source for the DT Swiss Aerolite 2 spokes, which supposedly make a wheel 1.1W more aero. But all of my hubs are normal straight pull not T head.
I'm just a bit concerned about using T head spokes on normal straight pull hubs, as the interfacial area reduces greatly going from straightpull to T head on a non-T head specific hub. So I'm worried about fatigue failures.
I'm just a bit concerned about using T head spokes on normal straight pull hubs, as the interfacial area reduces greatly going from straightpull to T head on a non-T head specific hub. So I'm worried about fatigue failures.
No. Roughly doubling (16 to 28sp) the amount of bladed spokes (CX-Ray) at 50kph only costs 3w (Zipp data).
Going round butted to bladed on 20spokes only saves 1.5w - 2.5w depending on the test you look at. A Cx-ray has around 1/3 the drag of a round butted spoke (in theory). The Zipp spoke count test infer that the spokes only eat around 8w total on a 24h wheel at 50kph. There's just not 1.1w to be saved with conventional spokes.
If they fatigue, they'll fail one by one. I suspect the nipple threads are weaker than the head even with the T-Head.
The stock wheelset replacement spokes will be bladed further down the spoke than the boxed-aftermarket spoke you'd buy, so there's that.
The Aerolite 2 look to be the wide type (3.0 wide vs the 2.2 wide) which the conventional hubs won't take without some reaming. That 1.1w is for both wheels and takes into account the spoke heads are aligned in the dicut / aero hubs. https://bikerumor.com/new-dt-swiss-arc- ... odynamics/
The Pillar ones I pointed out would be half as aero as the Cx-Ray/Round difference, so there'd be a 1w penalty or so. They're made out of similar metals, so they should be equal in strength in pratical use. Their Wing model would be better, but they don't tend to lay right, so they might not be better in practice.
Going round butted to bladed on 20spokes only saves 1.5w - 2.5w depending on the test you look at. A Cx-ray has around 1/3 the drag of a round butted spoke (in theory). The Zipp spoke count test infer that the spokes only eat around 8w total on a 24h wheel at 50kph. There's just not 1.1w to be saved with conventional spokes.
If they fatigue, they'll fail one by one. I suspect the nipple threads are weaker than the head even with the T-Head.
The stock wheelset replacement spokes will be bladed further down the spoke than the boxed-aftermarket spoke you'd buy, so there's that.
The Aerolite 2 look to be the wide type (3.0 wide vs the 2.2 wide) which the conventional hubs won't take without some reaming. That 1.1w is for both wheels and takes into account the spoke heads are aligned in the dicut / aero hubs. https://bikerumor.com/new-dt-swiss-arc- ... odynamics/
The Pillar ones I pointed out would be half as aero as the Cx-Ray/Round difference, so there'd be a 1w penalty or so. They're made out of similar metals, so they should be equal in strength in pratical use. Their Wing model would be better, but they don't tend to lay right, so they might not be better in practice.
It seems to me that going from a 2.4 (0.9x2.2) to 4.4 (0.7x3.1) aspect ratio plus adding in some aerofoil shaping beyond rounded rectangle should give a substantial drag savings. I could easily believe a 1.1W savings from that. But good catch on the spokes being in perfect alignment. Misaligned spokes are likley more important with the aerolite 2's due to the deeper spoke and the more aerofoily shape.jfranci3 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 15, 2022 5:38 pmNo. Roughly doubling (16 to 28sp) the amount of bladed spokes (CX-Ray) at 50kph only costs 3w (Zipp data).
Going round butted to bladed on 20spokes only saves 1.5w - 2.5w depending on the test you look at. A Cx-ray has around 1/3 the drag of a round butted spoke (in theory). The Zipp spoke count test infer that the spokes only eat around 8w total on a 24h wheel at 50kph. There's just not 1.1w to be saved with conventional spokes.
If they fatigue, they'll fail one by one. I suspect the nipple threads are weaker than the head even with the T-Head.
The stock wheelset replacement spokes will be bladed further down the spoke than the boxed-aftermarket spoke you'd buy, so there's that.
The Aerolite 2 look to be the wide type (3.0 wide vs the 2.2 wide) which the conventional hubs won't take without some reaming. That 1.1w is for both wheels and takes into account the spoke heads are aligned in the dicut / aero hubs. https://bikerumor.com/new-dt-swiss-arc- ... odynamics/
The Pillar ones I pointed out would be half as aero as the Cx-Ray/Round difference, so there'd be a 1w penalty or so. They're made out of similar metals, so they should be equal in strength in pratical use. Their Wing model would be better, but they don't tend to lay right, so they might not be better in practice.
I actually was talking to a Specialized engineer about them going to 18 spokes for the front Rapide CLX wheels. He said they saw large drag saving from doing so but wouldn't give me an acutal number. I have access to some cfd software. I should play around and get some real numbers while also looking at spoke shape and
the Pilar wing spokes as they are quite a bit thicker and the shape doesn't seem close to optimal for low yaw conditions.
I'm worried about both the T-head and the hub fatiguing. If it's just the heads I should be ok. However if it's the hub I could lose multiple spokes at once.
Nah, 1/3 the drag from round to elliptical is 2w. Going from 3:1 oval to 4.5:1 is not going to yeld a 50% (it's probably 20-30% on that next step, 300% diff = 2w, 1/10th of that is nothing) difference and probably won't perform as well in yaw. The larger spoke is easier to form into a desirable actual finished shape though. Might also be better in turbulent flow.
The biggest benefit is more ""light collection area" for aesthetics. An aero hub shell with regular bladed spokes would be a lot better than those with the stepped DT Swiss SP hub - maybe even the classic one would perform as well.
The biggest benefit is more ""light collection area" for aesthetics. An aero hub shell with regular bladed spokes would be a lot better than those with the stepped DT Swiss SP hub - maybe even the classic one would perform as well.
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com
