Levo Gen 2 Spoke tension for Roval Traverse 29" wheel

[RebornRider]

There are a few threads here asking about spoke tension, but I did not see a definitive answer in units of force. So I asked Roval. Here is their reply copy/pasted from the email:
===========================================
Hi Jeff

Thanks for the email. Recommended spoke tension for Roval wheels will be between 1,100-1,200 newtons drive side and non drive . Hope you are doing well.

-Rob
===========================================
1100 - 1200 N translates to 112 - 122 kg. My double butted spokes measure 1.6 mm in the middle. The Park Tool TM-1 conversion table says I should aim for 19 (114 kg) or a bit more on the TM-1 scale. This is assuming the TM-1 is properly calibrated, but that's another post.

FWIW, my as-found front wheel spoke tensions were all way below spec (a low of 64 kg!). The rears were closer to spec, but with more than 20% variation. After a Saturday of quality time spent truing and tension balancing, the wheels measure much better, but TBH I didn't notice any difference in my regular 21 mile ride. I guess my car doesn't feel any different after an oil change either, but I do it anyway.

 

[Mikerb]

I tune to G!

 

[RebornRider]

I tune to G!

OK, but which octave? ?

 

[urastus]

I measure the tensions for each side first, then find the average. Rotor side on the front should be higher, also cluster side on the rear should be higher. I then record the average for each side of each wheel. If a wheel is a little off centre in the frame (like a mm or so), it's easy to centre it when standardising the spoke tensions by adding a small amount of tension to one side, or subtracting a small amount of tension to one side. I usually go for around 5% variance when truing - so far I've been able to. After the time you put in, your wheels will be stronger.

 

[DreamensioN]

When I true my road wheels (haven't had to do my Levo wheels yet) - I just use the Park Tool Wheel Tension App. It keeps a record of everything and shows a radar diagram of where the tension is balanced. Makes it really easy to look back historically, and also to see where your tension lies in the wheel (helps diagnose issues you have them).

 

[moonie17]

Hey guys... very useful thread this as i was tinkering with my Roval Traverse 29s last night.

I see in the response from Roval that the same tension is to be used for both the drive and non-drive side, is this correct?

These rims are 'symmetrical' right? but i have read in other places that when a rim is 'symmetrical' the hub has to sit slightly off the rim, thus requiring slightly different tensions on both sides.

Appreciate if one of you kind chaps could clarify!

 

[RebornRider]

Some wheel builders advocate using higher tension on the drive side in the rear and the brake disk side in the front. The theory is that this is needed (or beneficial) because those spokes will experience higher forces. I do not know if that theory is supported by data. Roval recommended the same range for both sides.

You could satisfy everybody by setting the drive/brake side to 1200 N and the other side to 1100 N.

 

[urastus]

Some wheel builders advocate using higher tension on the drive side in the rear and the brake disk side in the front. The theory is that this is needed (or beneficial) because those spokes will experience higher forces. I do not know if that theory is supported by data. Roval recommended the same range for both sides.

You could satisfy everybody by setting the drive/brake side to 1200 N and the other side to 1100 N.

Wheel builders use differing tensions for each side to centre the rim in the frame. It's a necessity because a cluster takes up more room than a rotor; so how do you center the rim for the frame? Well, you have to move the rim closer to the cluster by tightening the spokes on that side, or loosening the spokes on the other side, or a bit of both. Your wheels are not symmetrical; if you had equal tension on all spokes the wheel would be at it's strongest, but the rim would sit closer to the rotor side when in the frame. If you had equal tension on all spokes for the front wheel, the rim would sit closer to the left fork leg (non rotor side). Asymmetric rims lessen the difference of spoke tensions needed for each side of the wheel.

 

[moonie17]

Wheel builders use differing tensions for each side to centre the rim in the frame. It's a necessity because a cluster takes up more room than a rotor; so how do you center the rim for the frame? Well, you have to move the rim closer to the cluster by tightening the spokes on that side, or loosening the spokes on the other side, or a bit of both. Your wheels are not symmetrical; if you had equal tension on all spokes the wheel would be at it's strongest, but the rim would sit closer to the rotor side when in the frame. If you had equal tension on all spokes for the front wheel, the rim would sit closer to the left fork leg (non rotor side). Asymmetric rims lessen the difference of spoke tensions needed for each side of the wheel.

Thanks Guys. I can confirm that this is true where the Roval Traverse's are concerned. I did all of my spokes (drive & non-drive side) to 19 TM1 and got them nice and true, although once the wheels were back on the bike they were offset by almost 10mm!!

Had to adjust to bring over slightly on both front and rear - didn't take long. On the rear this was achieved by slackening the rotor side and tightening same amount on drive side, on the front i slackened the non-rotor side and tightened the rotor side. Simples.

 

[urastus]

Thanks Guys. I can confirm that this is true where the Roval Traverse's are concerned. I did all of my spokes (drive & non-drive side) to 19 TM1 and got them nice and true, although once the wheels were back on the bike they were offset by almost 10mm!!

Had to adjust to bring over slightly on both front and rear - didn't take long. On the rear this was achieved by slackening the rotor side and tightening same amount on drive side, on the front i slackened the non-rotor side and tightened the rotor side. Simples.

Awesome, you've learnt a lot quickly, put it into practise and succeeded. It's the sort of thing that would intimidate some , and rightly so; you could really f... up too

 

[moonie17]

Awesome, you've learnt a lot quickly, put it into practise and succeeded. It's the sort of thing that would intimidate some , and rightly so; you could really f... up too

Haha thanks!! First time tryer here.... and absolutely loved it!

Sad to say but look forward to having a wobbly wheel again ?

 

[RebornRider]

Thanks Guys. I can confirm that this is true where the Roval Traverse's are concerned. I did all of my spokes (drive & non-drive side) to 19 TM1 and got them nice and true, although once the wheels were back on the bike they were offset by almost 10mm!

That is really surprising. The spoke length calculators I've looked at recommend using different spoke lengths to center the rim. Seems like the obvious solution to me. I assumed (a dangerous thing to do!) that Roval did the same.

 

[RickBullotta]

If the spoke length(s) are correct for that build, you should be able to get the dish (offset) to a fairly accurate starting point by looking at where the nipple threads are relative to the nipple(s). Then use a truing stand to flip the wheel back and forth to get it dialed. Also, don't forget to stress relieve the wheel while building (I use a wooden dowel). My other wheelbuilding recommendation is to never, ever use alloy nipples - always brass. I'll trade durability for a few grams.

 

[urastus]

That is really surprising. The spoke length calculators I've looked at recommend using different spoke lengths to center the rim. Seems like the obvious solution to me. I assumed (a dangerous thing to do!) that Roval did the same.

Not really for centering: they generally do need different spoke lengths for each side of the wheel though, otherwise the spokes on the rotor side front or cassette side rear (where the shorter spokes go) would have the threads poking through into the wheel well - that's if you made all the spokes to the longer length. The alternative would be all the spokes to the shorter length, which would mean they probably wouldn't be long enough on the non rotor side front, or rotor side rear. Again, the difference between spoke lengths and their respective sides would be minimized or equal with an asymetrical rim.

 

[RickBullotta]

Not really for centering: they generally do need different spoke lengths for each side of the wheel though, otherwise the spokes on the rotor side front or cassette side rear (where the shorter spokes go) would have the threads poking through into the wheel well - that's if you made all the spokes to the longer length. The alternative would be all the spokes to the shorter length, which would mean they probably wouldn't be long enough on the non rotor side front, or rotor side rear. Again, the difference between spoke lengths and their respective sides would be minimized or equal with an asymetrical rim.

Some hub/wheel designs, such as the RaceFace Vault, compensate with varying hub flange diameters.